CROMPTON GREAVES LIMITED Vs. ITS WORKMEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave challenges the award dated Dec. 30, 1970 of the Eighth Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, in a reference made to it by the State Government under S. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 holding "the striking workmen entitled to their wages" for a portion of the strike period viz. from January 11, 1968 to the end of February, 1968, and directing the appellant to pay the same to the workmen within one month from the date of the publication of the award in the Calcutta Gazette.

(2.) For a proper appreciation of the questions involved in the appeal, it is necessary to set out the circumstances leading to the strike which lie in a short compass. On December 27, 1967, the appellant M/s. Crompton Greaves Ltd., Calcutta, (hereinafter referred to as "the Company"), which is an engineering concern engaged in the manufacture and sale of electrical products such as motor-fans, motor control gears, transformers and other electrical instruments, and has its Registered Office at Bombay and branches at several places in India, intimated to Greaves Cotton and Crompton Parkinston Associate concerns" workmen"s Union, Calcutta, (hereinafter referred to as "the Union") its decision to reduce the strength of the workmen in its branch at Calcutta on the ground of severe recession in business. Apprehending mass retrenchment of the workmen who numbered 353, the Union sought the intervention in the matter of the Minister-in-charge, Labour, and the Labour Commissioner. There-upon, the Assistant Labour Commissioner arranged joint conferences in his office of the representatives of the Union and the Company with a view to explore avenues for conciliation and amicable settlement. Two conferences were accordingly held on the 5th and 9th January, 1968 in which both the parties participated. As a result of these conferences, the Company agreed to hold bi-partite talk with the representatives of the Union at its Calcutta office on the morning of January 10, 1968 to find out the possibility of an agreed solution. The talk, as agreed, did take place on the morning of January 10, 1968 but no agreement could be arrived at. Whereas according to the Union, the Management of the Company was not serious to arrive at a negotiated settlement and merely made a show of discussing the matter with its representative, according to the Management of the Company, the unseemly and recalcitrant attitude adopted by the Union during the course of the talk led them to believe that the Union was not interested in any fruitful negotiation. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, however, continued to use his good offices to bring about an amicable settlement through another joint conference which was scheduled for January 12, 1968. On the afternoon of January 10, 1968, the Company without informing the Labour Commissioner that it was proceeding to implement its proposed scheme of retrenchment, hung up a notice retrenching 93 of its workmen belonging to its Calcutta office. Treating the step taken by the Company as pretty serious demanding urgent attention and immediate action, the workmen resorted to strike with effect from January 11, 1968 after giving notice to the appellant and the Labour Directorate and continued the same up to June 26, 1968. In the meantime the industrial dispute in relation to the justification of the aforesaid retrenchment was referred by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal on March 1, 1968. Subsequently, the State Government vide its order No. 8890-I.R./IR/10L-79/67 dated December 13, 1968 referred the issue of the workmen"s entitlement to wages for the strike period from January 11, 1968 to June 26, 1968 to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. By its aforesaid order dated December 30, 1976, the Industrial Tribunal acceded to the workmen"s demand for wages for the period commencing from January 11, 1968 to the end of February, 1968 but rejected their demand for the remaining period of the strike observing that "the redress for retrenchment having been sought by the Union itself through the Tribunal, there remained no justification for the workmen to continue the strike". The scope of the appeal is, therefore, restricted to the determination of the short question of entitlement or otherwise of the striking workmen to wages for the period commencing from January 11, 1968 and ending with February 29, 1968.

(3.) Before proceeding to formulate the points arising for consideration in this appeal, we think it appropriate to advert to the legal position bearing on the upshot of the appeal.