The Calcutta High Court has upheld the decision of the National Industrial Tribunal, which had rejected a demand for 19% compensation by workers of the India Government Mint due to an increase in weekly working hours. The Court ruled that the Tribunal’s findings were legally sound and did not require interference, dismissing the writ petition filed by the Calcutta Mint Workers Union.
The case arose after the management of the India Government Mint issued a notice in 1988 proposing an increase in weekly working hours from 37½ to 44 hours. This proposal, based on the 4th Pay Commission recommendations, was not accepted by workers at any of the three mint units located in Calcutta, Hyderabad, and Mumbai. In response, the employees formed a Joint Action Committee to peacefully protest the move.
Later, the 5th Pay Commission addressed the matter in its report and explicitly recommended strict enforcement of the 44-hour work week at all three mints. The Commission emphasized that continuing with shorter working hours only at these locations would be "discriminatory and contrary to the basic principle of 'equal pay for equal work'." The report stated:
“The substantial improvements in the scales of pay and other benefits that we have recommended would be applicable in the case of the Mint employees only if the working hours are increased to 44 hours per week.”
Following directions from the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), the question of providing 19% compensation for the increase in working hours was referred to the Ministry of Finance. The Finance Secretary rejected the compensation claim, stating:
There is no justification for grant of any compensation on account of increase in working hours in the Government of India Mint from 37½ hours to 44 hours per week. Further, for the period from 1.1.1996 to 26.5.1998, when the Mints did not work for 44 hours per week, the pay should be proportionately depressed.
As conciliation efforts failed, the matter was referred to a National Tribunal in 2005. The Tribunal was tasked with deciding whether the refusal to grant 19% compensation was legal and justified. In its award dated 30 July 2020, the Tribunal held:
The workmen of India Government Mint are not entitled for 19% compensation on account of the increase in working hours from 37½ to 44 hours per week. The management’s decision is just and legal.
The workers challenged this award through a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court. However, the Court emphasized that the role of the judiciary in reviewing executive decisions related to pay fixation and working hours is limited. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Haryana State Minor Irrigation Tubewells Corporation vs. G.S. Uppal, the High Court observed:
“The courts should interfere with administrative decisions pertaining to pay fixation only when they are found to be unreasonable, unjust, or prejudicial to a section of employees and taken in ignorance of material and relevant factors.”
The High Court also considered standard working hour norms under Indian labour laws, including the Factories Act, 1948, which permits up to 48 hours of work per week. Since the increased working hours at the mints remained within legal limits and were accompanied by pay and benefit adjustments, the Court concluded there was no cause for judicial interference.
Decided on: 20.03.2025
Case No.: WPA 4724 of 2022 | Calcutta Mint Workers Union & Ors. v. National Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata & Ors.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Sardar Amjad Ali, Mr. Puranjan Pal
Counsel for the Respondent/Union of India: Ms. Sabita Roy
Counsel for the Respondent No. 16: Ms. Sreetama Biswas
