RASHTRIYA CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS Vs. CHAIRMAN RAILWAY GOODS CLEARING FOR WARDING ESTABLISHMENT LABOUR BOARD FOR GREATER BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE impugned order dated 2nd March, 2004 has been passed by the Railway Goods Clearing and Forwarding Establishments Labour Board for greater Bombay. By the order, a wage revision has been effected with effect from 1st January, 2001 for the Mathadi Workmen engaged in the establishment of the petitioner. The service conditions of these workmen are governed by the Maharashtra Mathadi Hamal and Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969 and the Scheme framed thereunder. The operative directions issued by the statutorily constituted Board in its impugned order are as follows :

(2.) THE petitioner is a registered employer within the meaning of the Act and is registered with the Second Respondent, the Statutory Board, since 28th May, 1986 for engaging Mathadi Workers to carry out scheduled operations of loading, unloading and other ancillary operations. Prior to the registration of the petitioner with the second respondent, the wages and other conditions of service of Mathadi Workers employed with the petitioner were fixed as between the petitioner and a Labour Co-operative Society through which the workers were engaged- After the registration of the petitioner with the second respondent, the wages and conditions of service were regulated by the Board after hearing the petitioner and the fourth respondent which is a Union representing the Mathadi Workers employed with the petitioner. A number of settlements were signed in the past, the first of which dated 8th July, 1986 was operative until 31st December, 1987. Thereafter, a settlement was arrived at on 21st July, 1988 for the period commencing from 1st January, 1988 and ending on 30th September, 1992. By the said settlement, an increase of about 17% was granted to the daily rated workers and an increase of 10% plus Rs. 300/- per month was granted to piece rated workers apart from the levy payable to the Board. The settlement provided that the increase granted to daily rated and piece rated workers would be after adding an 11% rise in the Dearness Allowance declared by the second respondent on the wage rate prevailing on 31st December, 1987. After the expiry of the settlement dated 21st July, 1988, the wages, and other service conditions were revised by a settlement dated 23rd January, 1993 covering the period from 1st December, 1992 to 30th December, 1996. Under the said settlement, the petitioner agreed to grant a 12. 5% increase in the rates of piece rated workers and a 30% increase in the wages of daily rated and monthly rated workers. Clause 3 (b) of the settlement provided that the petitioner would grant every year, an increase in Dearness Allowance linked with the Consumer Price Index Number to Mathadi Workers at the rate declared by the second respondent from time to time. These facts have been set out in the affidavit in reply filed by the first and second respondents to demonstrate that the payment of Dearness Allowance was in addition to periodical wage revisions and this was a part of the accepted pattern of wage settlements in the past. The Board thus submits that the instant wage revision is consistent with the past pattern. III

(3.) THE last settlement of 23rd January, 1993, expired on 30th November, 1996. On 11th December, 1996, the Fourth respondent, Union, placed its demand seeking a 30% increase in the rates of wages. Demands were also raised by the Third respondent. The Board convened several meetings between February, 1999 and July, 2000 of the petitioner and the two Unions since there was no increase in the rates of wages of Mathadi Workers since 1996. No settlement was arrived at and the Union gave a notice of strike. A meeting was convened before the Commissioner of Labour on 3rd July, 2000. Further meetings took place on 13th July, 2000 and 18th July, 2000 after which an order was passed by the Board granting an interim increase of 10% to the Mathadi Workers over the existing emoluments. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition before this Court (Writ Petition 1840 of 2000) to challenge the interim direction, which was disposed of by an order dated 4th May, 2001. This Court set aside the order of the Board dated 18th July, 2000 and remanded the issue for decision by the Board in accordance with law. In the meantime, the petitioner was directed to pay an increase of 10% to the Mathadi Workers with effect from 1st January, 2001 as directed in the order of the Board dated 18th July, 2000 subject to final adjustment. Thus, the interim relief that was granted by the Board was continued by the order of this Court with prospective effect from 1st January, 2001.