MAHARASHTRA LABOUR UNION Vs. PRIDE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner union is challenging the correctness, propriety and legality of the judgment and award passed by the Industrial court, Pune in matter of Complaint (ULP) No. 116 of 1992, which was made by the petitioner in view of the provisions of Section 28 (1) read with item No. 6 of Schedule II and items No. 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.

(2.) FEW facts would be necessary to be mentioned for better understanding of the matter. The Respondents run a hotel under name and style "hotel Executive Ashok" situate at 5, University Road, Shivaji Nagar, pune, wherein about 100 workers happened to be employed. The complainant Union started functioning in the said establishment of the respondents in the last quarter of 1991 and the majority of the workmen employed in the said hotel became its members. It has been alleged by the petitioner that the management of the said Hotel did not like the advent of the complainant Union in the hotel and, therefore, they resorted to an illegal lock out towards the members of the complainant Union with effect from 24/02/1992. It has been alleged that the respondents have no reasonable cause to demand good conduct bond/undertaking from the members of the complainant Union in a specified form, which has been annexed to the complaint before the Industrial Court as exh. U-21, as a condition precedent to allow them to work. The petitioner alleged in the present petition that the said act on the part of the management an is "illegal lock out" with effect from 24/02/1992 and formed unfair labour practice which has been deprecated by the provisions of item No. 6 of schedule II and Items No. 9 and 10 of Schedule iv of the M. R. T. U and P. U. L. P. Act.

(3.) THE respondents contended that the said act was not unfair labour practice at all. The respondents also contended that there was no illegal lock out. It is contended by the respondents that the members of the Union started wearing red bands on the heads inside the hotel premises during working hours and also indulged in acts of violence, terrorism, and slogan-shouting etc. and therefore, the management was left with no alternative but to ask for the undertaking from them that they would not engage themselves in such behaviour. It was also contended that the act of the members of the Union in refusing to give the under taking amounts to illegal strike with effect from 24/02/1992 and, therefore the respondents would not be blamable for illegal lock out.