:1: 10752.11.wp ata IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10752 OF 2011 Swabhimani Kamgar Union ..Petitioner Vs. United Spirits Ltd and Anr ..Respondents Mrs. Anjali S. Ranade,for Petitioner Mr. K. M. Naik, Senior Counsel with Mr. Atman Mehta i/b M/s Haresh Mehta and Co,for Respondent No.1 CORAM :- A. V. NIRGUDE, J. DATE :- DECEMBER 15, 2011. P. C.: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 19th November, 2011 passed below Exhibit U-2 in Complaint(ULP)No.200 of 2011 by the learned Member, Industrial Court,Pune . The Petitioner union filed a complaint under Section 28 of the MRTU and PULP Act,1971 challenging the action of the Respondent employer of starting additional shift in the morning hours. Previously, there was only one shift in the Bottling Department between 9.00 to 5.00. With the proposed change, there would be two shifts. One in the morning and other in the afternoon. The union alleged that this change is done without consulting them and that change amounted to violation of the provisions of Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned Member of the Industrial Court rejected the application seeking interim relief holding that prima facie :2: 10752.11.wp there is no violation of Section 9-A and that prima facie the Respondent employer could show that representatives of various unions of the workers were consulted. The only question that arise in this Writ Petition is whether there is prima facie violation of provisions of Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act? Section 9-A reads thus:- No, employer, who proposes to effect any change in the conditions of service applicable to any workman in respect of any matter specified in the Fourth Schedule, shall effect such change, - (a) Without giving to the workmen likely to be affected by such change a notice in the prescribed manner of the nature of the change proposed to be effected; or (b) Within twenty-one days of giving such notice Provided that no notice shall be required for effecting any such change. (a) Where the change is effected in pursuance of any 1[settlement or award]; or (b) Where the workmen likely to be affected by the change are persons to whom the Fundamental and Supplementary Rules, Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, Revised Leave Rules, Civil Service Regulations, Civilians in Defence Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules or the Indian Railway Establishment Code or any other rules or regulations that may be notified in this behalf by the appropriate Government in the Official Gazette, apply 2 If one reads provisions of Section 9-A with provisions of 4th Schedule, one realizes that Item No.6 of the 4th Schedule would be violated only if the employer starts,alters, or discontinues shift working otherwise than in accordance with the Standing Orders. The Standing Orders are admittedly applicable to the parties in this case and the copy :3: 10752.11.wp of the same is annexed at page 43. Clause No.11 of the Standing Orders gives employer discretion to start the work in shifts. It further provides that if an additional shifts are started or restarted etc, seven days general notice should be given to the workers. Such a notice was admittedly given to the workers. In view of this, prima facie there appears no violation of Section 9A and in view of this, the issue of prior consultation would fall in to insignificance. There is prima facie no case in favour of the Petitioner. The Petition therefore fail. The Petition stands disposed of. The learned Judge of the Lower Court shall decide the complaint as soon as possible. ( A. V. NIRGUDE, J.)