Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Unfair Labour Practice Orders — Industrial Court's Findings Upheld Under MRTU & PULP Act. Employer Denied Salary and Benefits to Employees During Strike Period, Constituting Unfair Labour Practices Under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 58
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Limited and its General Manager, challenged two orders of the Industrial Court at Bombay dated March 30, 1998 and March 11, 2005. The first order held the petitioners guilty of unfair labour practices under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act) in Complaint (ULP) No.741 of 1990 filed by three employees: Ramesh R. Shirsat, Pandurang V. Ahire, and Chandrakant B. Nadkarni. The Industrial Court directed payment of salary and benefits from June 1, 1990. The second order quantified the amount payable to the legal heirs of deceased complainant Chandrakant Nadkarni at Rs.91,449.25 and issued a recovery certificate. The facts reveal that prior to 1982, the complainants worked as clerks in Kohinoor Mill No.3. In January 1982, a general strike by textile industry employees led to the Central Government taking over the mill's management and vesting it in the petitioner No.1 from October 18, 1983 under the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983. The complainants were not paid salary and benefits from June 1, 1990, leading to the complaint. The Industrial Court found the employer guilty of unfair labour practices. The High Court, in this writ petition, examined the orders and found no perversity or error of law warranting interference. The petition was dismissed, upholding the Industrial Court's findings and the recovery certificate.

Headnote

A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - Employer's Liability - The Industrial Court held the employer guilty of unfair labour practices for denying salary and benefits to employees who participated in a general strike, and directed payment from June 1, 1990. The High Court upheld the orders, finding no perversity or error of law. (Paras 1-3)

B) Industrial Law - Recovery Certificate - Section 50 of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - Quantification of Amount - The Industrial Court quantified the amount payable and issued a recovery certificate for Rs.91,449.25 in favour of the legal heirs of the deceased complainant. The High Court confirmed the quantification as based on evidence. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Industrial Court was justified in holding the petitioner guilty of unfair labour practices under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 and in issuing a recovery certificate for the quantified amount.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court orders dated March 30, 1998 and March 11, 2005.

Law Points

  • Unfair labour practice
  • Item 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act
  • 1971
  • Recovery certificate
  • Industrial Court jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (BOM) (08) 108

Writ Petition No.197 of 2006

2006-08-31

J.P. Devadhar

Mrs. Meena H. Doshi for the petitioners, Mr. P.M. Patel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Ms. B.B. Dholakia for respondent Nos.5 to 8

National Textile Corporation (Maharashtra North) Limited and The General Manager

Ramesh R. Shirsat, Vasudha Pandurang Ahire, Vilas Pandurang Ahire, Jeetendra Pandurang Ahire, Deepika Dattaram Chavan, Vaibhavi Vikas Mane, Vaishali Gajanan Chavan, Mangala Chandrakant Nadkarni

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging orders of Industrial Court in a complaint under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 alleging unfair labour practices.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought to quash the Industrial Court orders dated March 30, 1998 and March 11, 2005.

Filing Reason

Petitioners challenged the Industrial Court's finding of unfair labour practices and the quantification of amount payable.

Previous Decisions

Industrial Court allowed complaint (ULP) No.741 of 1990 on March 30, 1998, holding petitioners guilty of unfair labour practices and directing payment from June 1, 1990. On March 11, 2005, Industrial Court quantified amount and issued recovery certificate for Rs.91,449.25.

Issues

Whether the Industrial Court erred in holding the petitioners guilty of unfair labour practices under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. Whether the Industrial Court's quantification of amount and issuance of recovery certificate was proper.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the Industrial Court orders were erroneous and without jurisdiction. Respondents supported the Industrial Court orders as correct and based on evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Industrial Court's findings of unfair labour practices under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 were based on evidence and not perverse. The quantification of amount and issuance of recovery certificate were proper and within jurisdiction.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition filed on December 5, 2005, the petitioners seek to challenge two orders passed by the Industrial Court at Bombay on March 30, 1998 and March 11, 2005 in a complaint filed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. By the impugned order dated March 30, 1998, the Industrial Court allowed the complaint (ULP) No.741 of 1990 filed by the three complainants under the MRTU & PULP Act. By order dated March 11, 2005 passed in Miscellaneous Application No.26 of 2000 in complaint (ULP) No.741 of 1990 the Industrial Court quantified the amount payable by the petitioners by issuing a recovery certificate in the sum of Rs.91,449.25 paisa in favour of the legal heirs of the original complainant Mr.Chandrakant Nadkarni.

Procedural History

On March 30, 1998, the Industrial Court allowed Complaint (ULP) No.741 of 1990, holding the petitioners guilty of unfair labour practices and directing payment from June 1, 1990. On March 11, 2005, the Industrial Court quantified the amount and issued a recovery certificate for Rs.91,449.25. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.197 of 2006 on December 5, 2005 challenging both orders. The High Court dismissed the petition on August 31, 2006.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Schedule IV, Items 5 and 9
  • Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Unfair Labour Practice Orders — Industrial Court's Findings Upheld Under MRTU & PULP Act. Employer Denied Salary and Benefits to Employees During Strike Period, Constituting Unfair Labour ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Nursing College Seeking Recognition for B.Sc and M.Sc Nursing Courses. Appellant failed to submit complete application and lacked own Parent Hospital as required by Indian Nursing Council guidelines.