KRISHNARAJENDRA MILLS WORKERS UNION Vs. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions have been filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution by two different sets of workmen, the first by persons who are the members of the Krishnarajendra Mills Workers' Union, and the second, by the workmen of Krishnarajendra Mills Karmika Sangha. The prayer made in both these writ petitions is for a writ of certiorari to quash the settlement arrived at between respondents 2 to 5 with the assistance of the Conciliation Officer who is respondent No.

(2.) In W.P. No.456 of 1967, there is a specific prayer for issuing a direction to respondent No.2 to pay wages and dearness allowance to the workmen in accordance with the settlement dated 1-7-1963 which, according the petitioners, is still in force. There is also a prayer for a writ of mandamus restraining the Conciliation Officer from giving effect to the said settlement on the ground that the same was illegal and void.

(3.) The circumstances under which these two writ petitions have been filed are briefly as follows:-The Krishnarajendra Mills, Limited, Mysore, is a textile mill working in Mysore. The two petitioners and respondents 3 to 5 in W. P. No. 456 of 1967 are the different unions of workmen. Of these 5 Unions, the Krishnarajendra Mills Labour Association (respondent No. 3) and Krishnarajendra Mills Staff Association (respondent No.5) in W. P. No. 456 of 1967 are the recognised unions. There were a number of disputes between the workmen and the management of the Mills as regards the implementation of the recommendations of the Central Wage Board for the Cotton Textile Industry. These disputes were referred to the Industrial Tribunal in I. D. No.12 of 1961 and that Tribunal passed an award. The labour as also the management were aggrieved by the award. The respondent-Mill and the third respondent-labour association, filed Writ Petitions Nos 90 and 212 of 1963 before this Court challenging the award on various points. During the pendency of these writ petitions, the parties came to a settlement and filed a memorandum of compromise before the Court and the Court quashed the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal and substituted the compromise in its place. This settlement was to be in force for a period of 4 years commencing from 1-7-1963. On 28th September 1966, the second respondent, the Mills, addressed a letter to the first respondent, the Conciliation Officer, requesting him to initiate conciliation proceedings as regards the dearness allowance payable to the workers since the management felt that the linking of dearness allowance with the cost of living index had imposed an unbearable burden on them. The Conciliation Officer brought about a settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act on 30-9-1966 as per Ex. B. According to the terms of this settlement, it was agreed that the dearness allowance payable to the staff members and to the workmen was to be paid at those rates for the months of September, October, November and December 1966. It was further stipulated that from January 1967 onwards, payment of dearness allowance was to be on the basis of the previous system envisaged in the agreement dated 1-7-1963. It is thereafter the the settlement impugned in these writ petitions came into existence on 16-1-1967 through the good offices of respondent No. 1. The dearness allowance payable to the workers under settlement is fixed at a flat rate of Rs. 90 per month for a period of two years from 1-1-1967. There are other details which it is unnecessary to mention for the purpose of these writ petitions.