LAWS(KAR)-2012-4-59

KENNAMETAL INDIA LTD Vs. KENNAMETAL INDIA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION

Decided On April 18, 2012
M/s Kennametal India Ltd. Appellant
V/S
KENNAMETAL INDIA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 26.8.2011, Annexure -M passed by the Certifying Officer and the order dated 29.10.2011, Annexure -Q, passed by the Appellate Authority. Petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of cutting tools and other allied products. Respondent is the trade union representing the workmen in the petitioner's company. The relationship between the petitioner's company and the respondent -workmen is governed by certified standing orders as required under Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Clause - 22 of the certified standing orders deals with the retirement age of workmen and the same reads as under:

(2.) THE respondent trade union filed an application before the Deputy Labour Commissioner -cum -Certifying Officer for amendment of Clause 22 of the Standing Order enhancing the age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years. On contest the certifying officer by his order dated 30.9.2009 allowed the claim of the respondent union amending Clause -22 by fixing the age of retirement at 60 years. Aggrieved by this order the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.5.2010. Aggrieved by the order of certifying officer and the Appellate Authority, the petitioner approached this court in W.P. No. 16922/2010. Learned single Judge of this court vide order dated 19.11.2010 allowed the writ petition and set -aside the order passed by the certifying officer and the appellate authority on the ground that an application for amendment of a clause in the settlement before the expiry of settlement period as not maintainable. The respondent union being aggrieved by the order of learned single Judge filed an appeal in W.A. No. 400/2011. A Division Bench of this court by order dated 27.7.2011 disposed the writ appeal with an observation as under:

(3.) HEARD arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.