The Excise Department gave an advertisement in the newspaper for certain vacancies of subordinate staff under the signature of Bhuwan. In the advertisement it was clearly mentioned that such staff will be paid the daily

Section 8 of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 provides that every employee shall be entitled to be paid by his employer in an accounting year, bonus, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, provided he has worked in the establishment for not less than thirty working days in that year. Further, Section 9 of the Act deals with the disqualification for bonus and it states that an employee shall be disqualified from receiving bonus if he is dismissed from service for- fraud; riotous or violent behaviour while on the premises of the establishment; or theft, misappropriation, or sabotage of any property of the establishment. It is to be noticed that the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 is a complete and exhaustive Code on the payment of bonus to the employees and the Act gives a right to the employees to receive bonus in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Act does not permit an employer to withhold payment of a bonus during the pendency of a disciplinary inquiry. It is, therefore, obvious that if an enquiry is pending for a long period, bonus cannot be withheld on that account. In the case of Wheel & Rim Company of India Ltd. v. Government of Tamil Nadu, Hon'ble High Court was not inclined to accept the argument that Section 9 is restricted only to the receiving of bonus by the disqualified employee payable for the accounting year in which the order of dismissal is passed. On a consideration of all the circumstances, and the High Court observed that this disqualification is applicable to whatever bonus was payable under the Act. In the present case, in as much as the dismissal took place, the employer was entitled to disqualify the employee for the bonus for the accounting year 2019-20 as well as for the accounting year 2020-21. Moreover, the employee had entered into a settlement under section 18(1) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 by which he gave up his claim prior to his dismissal. Even though the settlement was not marked before the Labour Court, the employee is bound by the said settlement and, therefore, cannot at all claim any benefit for the period prior to this dismissal. In accordance with the above, Ramesh may not be entitled to the Bonus.