• Legal Era India
  • Legal Era Global
  • Membership
  • Sign inSUBSCRIBE
Legal Era
X
Sign in
  • Home
  • News
    +
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    +
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    +
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events
  • News
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events
search-icon

Top Stories

HomeNews
5 Aug 2020 8:37 AM GMT

Plea in SC against Gujarat order for longer working hours, no overtime

By Legal Era

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice challenging the notification of the Gujarat Labour and Employment Department, granting exemptions to all factories in the state from provisions of the Factories Act, 1948, relating to daily working hours, weekly working hours, intervals for rest, and even from the duty to pay overtime wages at double rate as fixed under the Act’s Section 59.The...

ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to Legal Era

Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion

Subscribe Now
AlreadyaSubscriber?SigninNow
View Plans

Supreme-Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice challenging the notification of the Gujarat Labour and Employment Department, granting exemptions to all factories in the state from provisions of the Factories Act, 1948, relating to daily working hours, weekly working hours, intervals for rest, and even from the duty to pay overtime wages at double rate as fixed under the Act’s Section 59.

The plea, filed by Gujarat Mazdoor Sabha, a registered trade union, and others, through advocate Aparna Bhat, contended that April 17 notification “is patently illegal, violative and unnaturally unjust of various fundamental rights, statutory rights and labour laws”.

A bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and K.M. Joseph took up the plea, through video conferencing, and issued notice after a hearing.

The plea contended that the notification, granting exemption from the provisions of the Act for the period from April 20 to July 19, mandates that for the period, workers in Gujarat could be made to work 12 hours in a day, 72 hours in a week with a 30 minutes break after six hours. However, the Factories Act, 1948, provides that workers can only be made to work nine hours in a day - but 48 hours in a week, with one weekly off - thus coming to 8 hours in a day, with a 30 minutes break after five hours.

The notification further provides that no women workers will be allowed to work between 7 p.m. and 6 a.m.

“Most disturbingly, the impugned notification prescribes that no overtime at double rate will be paid for the extra four hours worked per day, but rather that overtime work will merely be compensated at the usual hourly rate,” said the plea.

The petitioner argued that the notification expressly states that wages for the extra hours will be paid “in proportion to the existing wage (e.g., if wages for eight hours is Rs 80, then proportionate wages for twelve hours will be Rs 120”). “This is blatantly against section 59 of the Act which mandates that wages must be paid at double the ordinary rate for hours worked in excess of 9 hours in a day (including one hour break) and 48 hours in a week,” added the plea.

The plea submitted that this notification states that the workers will be not only be grossly overworked, but the fact that the direction for no payment of overtime rate for overtime worked “just adds a sordid element of cruelty to a blatantly illegal notification, all in respect of the workers who are quite literally risking their lives to ensure the sustenance of the economy”.

The petitioners argued that “the shocking extension of working hours is being directed at a time when the most basic medical and scientific advice to avoid contracting the deadly Covid-19 is to take rest and stay as healthy as possible” as they urged the apex court to issue directions to stay this notification.

Next Story
Similar Posts
Trending Now
Recommended Articles
  • News
  • From the Courts
  • Supreme Court (India)
  • High Court (India)
  • Global Insights
  • Deal Street
  • Hires & Moves
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Articles
  • Zoom In
  • Take On Board
  • In Focus
  • Law & Policy
  • IP & Tech Era
  • Viewpoint
  • Arbitration & Mediation
  • Tax
  • Student Corner
  • Interviews
  • Law Firms
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Membership
  • Reader's Feedback
  • Cartoons
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
Follow Us
Subscribe Newsletter
  • 2023© All rights reserved Legal Era Media Group
  • Who We Are
  • Careers
  • Advertise with Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
Powered by  Hocalwire
X
X