Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Siemens Ltd., an employer, challenged an order dated 26.10.2009 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Thane, which rejected its application to decide a preliminary issue. The employer had moved a preliminary objection on 19.11.2007, contending that no industrial dispute exists between the company and its employees because of a settlement dated 03.04.2006, which was arrived at with the Employees Union and accepted by the majority of employees across India, including workers at the Kalwe Factory. The respondent no.1, a union claiming to be a recognised union of the staff, resisted the objection. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, held that based on the settlement and the Charter of Demand dated 08.06.2006, it was difficult to accept that no dispute exists, and thus rejected the preliminary objection, directing the main matter to proceed on all issues. The High Court noted that the importance of a settlement cannot be overlooked. There was no dispute that a settlement existed, and the company and union had arrived at several settlements since 1998, including those dated 26.05.1998, 10.07.2001, 04.09.2003, and 03.04.2006. The benefits of these settlements were accepted by the majority of employees, with only 4-5 members not accepting. The Court observed that the preliminary objection goes to the root of the matter, as if no industrial dispute exists in view of the settlement, there is no question of proceeding further on the basis of objections raised by respondent no.1, whose recognition itself is under challenge. The Court held that the preliminary objection should be decided at the earliest point of time, and the merits of the objection need not be taken note of unless the preliminary issue is resolved. Accordingly, the Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Industrial Tribunal to decide the preliminary objection as a preliminary issue within three months.
Headnote
A) Industrial Dispute - Preliminary Objection - Existence of Dispute - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The employer challenged the rejection of its preliminary objection that no industrial dispute exists due to a settlement dated 03.04.2006. The Court held that the settlement, which was accepted by the majority of employees, goes to the root of the matter and must be decided as a preliminary issue before proceeding further. (Paras 2-5) B) Settlement - Binding Effect - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Court emphasized the importance of settlements and noted that the employer and union had arrived at multiple settlements since 1998. The benefits were accepted by most employees, and only 4-5 members did not accept. The Court held that if no industrial dispute exists in view of the settlement, there is no question of proceeding further on the basis of objections raised by a union whose recognition is under challenge. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Tribunal erred in rejecting the employer's preliminary objection that no industrial dispute exists in view of a binding settlement, and whether such objection should be decided as a preliminary issue.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.10.2009 is set aside. The Industrial Tribunal is directed to decide the preliminary objection as a preliminary issue within three months from the date of the order. Rule made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Preliminary objection
- existence of industrial dispute
- settlement binding effect
- reference jurisdiction
