PETITIONER:
H.R. ADYANTHAYA AND OTHERS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SANDOZ (INDIA) LIMITED
DATE OF JUDGMENT12/05/1994
BENCH:
KULDIP SINGH (J)
SAWANT, P.B.
YOGESHWAR DAYAL (J)
CITATION:
1994 SCC (4) 164 JT 1994 (5) 176
1994 SCALE (2)1015
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
ORDER In view of the conflict between three three-Judge Bench decisions of this Court in May & Baker (India) Ltd. v. Workmen’, Western India Match Co. Ltd. v. Workmen2 and Burmah Shell Oil Storage & Distribution Co. of India v. Burmah Shell Management Staff Association3 on the one hand and later three three-Judge Bench decisions in S.K. Verma v. Mahesh Chandra4, Ved Prakash Gupta v. Delton Cable India (P) Ltd.5 and Arkal Govind Raj Rao v. Ciba Geigy of India Ltd., Bombay6 on the other, on the interpretation of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and consequently the status of the medical/sales representatives prior to 6-3- 1976 when the Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976 was brought into force and also prior to 21-8-1984 when the definition of "workman" under the Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act was amended, we are of the view that propriety demands that the matter be heard by a larger Bench. We, therefore, refer the matter to a five- Judge Bench to be constituted by the learned Chief Justice of India for the purpose. These papers be placed before the learned Chief Justice for constituting the Bench. 167