INDIAN PILOTS GUILD Vs. AIR INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal brings to fore the competing rights of parties in a lis, which has its genesis in the merger of two national air carriers, i.e., Air India and Indian Air Lines. In this, internecine and passionate battle of rights there are several dramatis personae. The appellant, which is a trade union representing evidently 600 pilots of erstwhile Air India is one such party, the respondent which is the management is the other party. But there is an important party to this lis which, often goes unrepresented, which is, the passenger. The respondent, that is, the management, in this litigation, seeks to represent this powerless, but important player, i.e., the passenger. One may or may not be able to decipher the motive of the respondent for doing so, but surely, as is well known, of which we can take judicial notice, that the respondent would find it difficult to survive if the passenger were to give up on it. THIS is apart, from the fact that, a national carrier is required to fulfill certain social obligations by connecting remote parts of the country, which may not be, economically gainful for private players presently operating in the aviation industry. 1.1 There is also another element of large public funds being infused to keep the respondent organization afloat. A private organization would have wound up given the financial constraints of the respondent but it is the infusion of public funds by the Government of India (GOI) which has kept the respondent afloat. In such difficult times all stake holders have to make sacrifices and the endeavour should be to rescue the organization from the financial difficulty, it finds itself in. On the other hand the members of the appellant appear to have taken the movement as an opportunity to raise issues about their alleged rights pending consideration before the competent court to bring the functioning of the respondent to a stand-still. The action of the appellant thus, is undoubtedly contrary to public weal.

(2.) WITH this preface articulated, what presently ails the appellant is this: The appellant is aggrieved by the ex-parte order dated 09.05.2012, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the appellant (original defendant no.1) has been restrained from continuing with: "illegal strike and/or reporting sick and/or staging demonstrations, dharnas, gheraos etc. inside and outside the premises of the plaintiff - company located at the Airports, Terminals, Head Offices and all other offices of the plaintiff - company including the residence of the officers of the plaintiff - company. The defendant no. 1, its members and all others acting on its behalf are further restrained from obstructing ingress and egress from the Head Office, the Regional Offices or any other offices/ branches and counters of the plaintiff-company, wherever these are...."

(3.) WHAT evidently has brought about consternation, in so far as the respondent is concerned, is the continued confrontationist attitude of the members of the appellant. The members of the appellant, according to the respondent, have resorted to illegal concerted actions, which include failure to report for duty. Consequently, the flights which were scheduled for destinations such as, New York, Chicago, Toronto on 4th, 5th and 6th May, 2012 had to be rescheduled, which resulted in delay in excess of 14 hours. The device of sickness adopted by the members of the appellant forced the respondent to send the doctors at the residence of the pilots, which revealed in some cases that the pilots were not sick, and in the others, the concerned pilots refused to co-operate with the doctors. It is averred by the respondent that the continued illegal strike of the members of the appellant had resulted in disrupting the flight schedules, causing not only inconvenience to thousands of passengers but also a huge financial loss. It appears that prior to the institution of the suit, the respondent on account of the impugned actions of the members of the appellant, had to cancel nearly 24 flights.