DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED Vs. B D GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises in this writ petition is whether it is open to the union to agree and settle Industrial Dispute pending before a Labour Court regarding termination, of the services of an individual employee even when he is not agreeable to such settlement and is in fact opposed to it.

(2.) This writ petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order of the Presiding Officer, Additional Labour Court respondent No. 1 by which it rejected the application of the petitioner management and held that the settlement dated 23-10-1971 made between the petitioner company and respondent No. 3, the Dunlop Rubber Company (India) Ltd. Delhi Branch Employees Union through the Secretary is not binding on respondent No. 2, Khushi Ram Aggarwal, employee and accordingly a 'No dispute Award' cannot be passed.

(3.) By its letter dated 30-6-1970 the petitioner company informed respondent No. 2 that his services are terminated with immediate effect and that he would receive one month's salary in lieu of the notice. A great deal of correspondance ensued between the parties of which a reference will be made later on in the judgment. The matter was even taken up by the Conciliation Officer. But as the Conciliation proceedings did not succeed the Lt. Governor, Delhi by means, of notification dated 24-12-70 referred under Section 10(l)(c), 12(5) of Industrial Dispute Act the existing dispute between the management and its workman Khushi Ram Aggarwal, as represented by the union for adjudication to respondent No. 1. The terms of reference are as follows: