GENERAL SECRETARY, COCHIN PORT TRUST THOZHILALI UNION Vs. PRESIDENT, UNITED STEVEDORES ASSOICATION (P) LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Union, espousing the cause of certain employees who were retrenched from the pool created by the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is an Association of Stevedores, operating within the Cochin Port. As early as in 1993, a dispute was raised with respect to the employment of stacking workers, called "Chikkar boys", engaged for the container packing work under the various stevedores. Prior to 1993, many such employees were employed under the individual stevedores, which resulted in employment/unemployment on the basis of the work which an individual stevedore has. This resulted in a resentment among the workers, which eventually gave rise to the dispute, which was settled on the intervention of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), as is indicated at Exhibit P1.

(2.) The 1st respondent herein, an Association of Stevedores, one of the steamer agents as nominated by the Cochin Steamer Agents Association and the representative Union agreed to the terms of settlement and reduced it to writing as indicated in Exhibit P1. The intention of the settlement was the effective utilisation of the workers for container high stacking, so as to ensure that no disparity is caused among the 80 [eighty] workers who were popularly known as "Chikkar boys". The Consultative Body elected by the nominees of the 1st respondent was to take decisions for running the pool on a day-to-day basis. The conditions of employment of these workers, minimum guaranteed wages, incentives and other incidental aspects of employment were settled as per Exhibit P1. A pool of 80 workers was also appended to the terms of settlement, as Annexure-II. In pursuance of the settlement, a seniority list was drawn up on 20.06.1993, which was approved by the respective Unions and which is produced at Exhibit P7. Subsequently, in the year 1998, specifically on 18.03.1998, a seniority list of such workers was alleged to have been published in the notice board of the 1st respondent, produced herein as Exhibit P8; prior to the retrenchment of the employees, the grievances of certain of whom, are ventilated by the petitioner-Union.

(3.) The retrenchment effected was of 31 workers, of which 15 organised themselves into a Union and raised a dispute as to their retrenchment, which, according to them, was an illegal termination. The appropriate Government made a reference, which was answered against the Union, by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal as per Exhibit P12; which is assailed in the above writ petition.