(1.) IN this batch of intra-Court appeals, the assail is to the order dated 12.9.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in<RP> M/s. Richa and Company</RP> v. Shri Suresh Chand [W.P.(C) No.10744/2006] and other connected matters whereby the learned Single Judge has dislodged the award dated 22.12.2005 passed in the applications filed by the workmen under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1948 (for brevity ï¿ 1/2the Actï¿ 1/2) whereby the Industrial Tribunal-II, Delhi (for short ï¿ 1/2the tribunalï¿ 1/2) has directed the management to fix the duty hours of the workmen from 9.30 am to 6.00 pm which was prevalent prior to 1.7.2002.
(2.) SANS unnecessary details, the facts which are essential to be stated are that during the pendency of a dispute raised by the workers union regarding annual increment, transport allowance, summer and winter uniform and enhancement in tea allowance, the respondent-management changed the working hours from 9.30 am to 6.15 pm instead of 9.30 am to 6.00 pm which included a tea break from 4.00 pm to 4.15 pm. As the working hours were changed, a complaint was filed by the union of the workmen, which was not entertained by the tribunal vide order dated 7.2.2004 holding that the application of the union under Section 33A of the Act was not maintainable. Thereafter, the appellants ï¿ 1/2 workmen filed separate complaints seeking similar relief contending that during the pendency of the reference, the terms and conditions of service could not have been altered. The said applications were resisted by the management on the foundation that the change of working hours was not connected with the reference in question and the provisions of Section 33A of the Act were not attracted. The tribunal by the award dated 22.12.2005 expressed the view that there was a change in the conditions of service of the employees and accordingly directed the management to maintain the working hours which were prevalent before the disputes arose.
(3.) BEING of this view, the learned Single Judge set aside the award passed by the tribunal. At this juncture, we may note with profit what has been held by the tribunal. The tribunal referred to an appointment letter Ex.CW1/1 issued by the management on 1.10.1993 conveying the duty timing by 9.30 am to 6 pm and opined that there was a material change in the conditions of service of the employees. Thereafter, the tribunal has opined thus: