Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Case Name:: Spl. Appl. Writ Nos. 748, 793, 794, 803, 897, 898, 899 of 2016
Case Name:: Spl. Appl. Writ Nos. 748, 793, 794, 803, 897, 898, 899 of 2016
Judgment:
The writ appeals are accordingly dismissed
Case name
Grindwell N0rt0n Limited and an0ther v Transp0rt and General Kamgar Uni0n and an0ther2
Facts:
C0mpany and said resp0ndent n0s.2 and 3 entered int0 L0ng Term Settlement. Petiti0ner
entered int0 c0llective bargaining 0f demands raised by uni0n as well as c0mpany’s demand
in relati0n t0 pr0ductivity. Resp0ndent n0.1 filed applicati0n seeking stay 0f implementati0n
and effect 0f settlement. Petiti0ner 0pp0sed same and filed reply and Industrial C 0urt after
hearing parties passed 0rder staying effect and implementati0n 0f settlement and directed
petiti0ner t0 pay interim wage rise 0f Rs. 3,000/- per m0nth t0 all w0rkers empl0yed by
petiti0ners. Hence, instant petiti0n was filed.
Issues
Reasoning:
In view 0f fact that reference is still pending bef0re Tribunal effect 0f interim 0rder is t0
imp0se up0n petiti0ner additi0nal m0nthly burden 0f Rs. 3000/- per m0nth with0ut leading t0
higher pr0ductivity agreed t0 be 0ffered by w0rkmen c0ncerned. Equally, it ign0res fact that
each 0f w0rkmen wh0 are b0und by said settlement were und0ubtedly in maj0rity uni0n
and min0rity membership w0uld have succeeded in delaying settlement at least temp 0rarily
till Industrial C0urt decides.
2
Grindwell N0rt0n Limited and an0ther v Transp0rt and General Kamgar Uni0n and
an0ther(2018 Indlaw MUM 1615)
Conclusion:
Held, impugned 0rder imp0sed up0n petiti0ner 0bligati0n t0 pay ad h0c wage increase 0f Rs.
3,000/- per m0nth per w0rker with0ut any 0bligati0n 0n part 0f w0rker t0 increase
pr0ductivity. settlement is put in 0perati0n and it is said that w0rkmen wh0 are b0und by
higher pr0ductivity have been frustrated 0n tw0 c0unts firstly, 0n being deprived 0f wage
increase by Rs. 5,350/- and at same time by n 0t linking wage increase 0f 0ther uni0ns
members t0 higher pr0ductivity. This is certainly n0t desirable state 0f affairs given fact that
resp0ndent n0.1 has clearly indicated that it is n0t willing t0 increase pr0ductivity 0n basis
that n0 scientific study has been carried 0ut and their submissi0n is that increase in
pr0ductivity is likely t0 have negative effect 0n health 0f w0rkmen. In this scenari0, it is n0t
0pen t0 resp0ndent n0.1- uni0n t0 prevent 0perati0n 0f settlement in interregnum pending
decisi0n 0f reference. Rule made abs0lute.