WEBBING AND BELTING FACTORY (PVT.) LTD., GHAZIABAD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of handloom cloth and fabrics. The workmen of the company made a demand for dearness allowance in addition to the wages they were being paid. The dispute was espoused by the Webbing and Belting, Karamchari Sangh, Ghaziabad on behalf of the workmen of the petitioner company. The State Government, by an order dated April 25, 1972, referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal (I) Uttar Pradesh.

(2.) In the year 1964 the workmen of the petitioner company raised a dispute regarding wages and dearness allowance which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The Tribunal gave an award dated April 29, 1964 granting consolidated wages including dearness allowance. In 1967 the workmen again raised an industrial dispute for additional dearness allowance. The said dispute was also referred to the Industrial Tribunal which rejected the claim of the workmen by its award dated November 23, 1968. From the award of 1968 it appears that the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the financial position of the company did not permit grant of any more dearness allowance. In 1970 the workmen moved the Conciliation Officer for constituting a Conciliation Board to settle the industrial dispute between the parties in respect of revision of rates of wages and grant of dearness allowance linked with the Cost of Living Index. A Conciliation Board was constituted. The dispute was, however amicably settled and a document dated 30th April, 1970 was executed by the parties incorporating the terms of the agreement. It appears that in lune 1971 the workmen presented a charter of demand to the petitioner company with regard to payment of dearness allowance which was ultimately referred to the Tribunal for adjudication resulting in the impugned award.

(3.) A perusal of the award indicates that some preliminary objections were raised by the petitioner company before the Tribunal which were negatived by it. As those objections have not been raised before me in arguments, they may be taken to have been waived.