Case: Engineering Workers Association Vs. Radium Creation Limited &amp; Others

3. A complaint under Section 28 read with Item 6 of Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of the Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short "the Act")was filed by thebefore the Industrial Court, Maharashtra at Thane alleging, inter alia, that thewas indulging in an unfair labour practise inasmuch as it had imposed an illegal lock out on 202 members of theThe complainant prayed for a declaration to the effect that thehad engaged in unfair labour practices within the meaning of Item 6 Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Act aforementioned besides a direction quashing notice dated 05.07.2014 in regard to theordered by it. Thefurther sought a direction to theto allow the workmen concerned to resume their normal duties and to pay their wages and salary in view of the undertaking given by the Association that they would maintain peace and tranquility at the work place.4. The complaint aforementioned was accompanied by an application for grant of an interim relief to the effect that theshould not give effect to theand that it should allow the workmen named in the notice to resume their normal duties and that they should be paid wages in view of the undertaking given to the company. That prayer it appears was opposed by theand eventually rejected by the Industrial Court by its order dated 24.07.2014. Aggrieved thefiled Writ Petition No.9196 of 2014 which as noticed earlier has been dismissed by a Single Judge of the High Court at Bombay, hence the present appeal.

Reasoning:
10. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made at the bar. Thelimited issue as already seen above is whether the amount deposited by thecan be released in favour of the workman concerned.It is true that the workmen have sufferedfor nearly one year and may have been put to great hardship on that account but it is equally true that their entitlement to the benefits would depend upon whether the lock out was legally valid and justified. That finding has yet to be recorded by the Industrial Court.11.The question then is whether it is just and proper to direct disbursement of the entire amount that has been deposited or any part of it pending such a finding and if so the condition on which such payment can be made.Having given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions made before us we are of the view that interest of justice would be sufficiently served if the affected workmen except those who have either resigned from the service of the respondent company as alleged by Mr. Singh or who are charged and are facing domestic inquiry should be paid 50% of the wages due to them for the lock out period. The amount deposited by thein this Court shall for that purpose stand transferred to the Industrial Court, Thane, which shall utilise the same for disbursement in terms of the above. The release in favour of the workmen shall however be subject to the condition that each one of them files before the Industrial Court an undertaking to the effect that in case the said court records a finding that thewas legal or justified and that finding is finally upheld by the appellate/revisional authorities the amount so received shall be refunded back to the company.12. As regards the 40 workmen qua whom thestands withdrawn but who are facing the disciplinary proceedings, we leave it to the Industrial Court to examine whether any payment of wages can be made in their favour also by way of an interim direction. In case the Industrial Tribunal comes to the conclusion that such a payment deserves to be made, the Industrial Court shall do the needful by utilising the amount already in deposit. The excess if any remaining unutilised shall be invested in a fixed term deposit. The Industrial Court shall also be free to direct further deposit by the company in case of shortfall to enable it to make the payment of such wages as the Industrial Court may consider just and proper.