HINDUSTAN LEVER MAZDOOR SABHA Vs. HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these Writ Petitions challenge the Award dated 7th september 2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai in Reference (IT) No. 39 of 1997. For the sake of convenience, the Petitioner in Writ petition No. 1924 of 2003 and the Respondent in Writ Petition (Stamp)No. 28048 of 2003 will be called the Union and the Respondent in Writ petition No. 1924 of 2003 and the Petitioner in Writ Petition (Stamp)No. 28048 of 2003 will be called the Company.

(2.) THE Union claims to represent the employees who are known as field force employees working with the Company. The dispute in the present Writ Petitions relates to these employees. Correspondence was exchanged in 1957 between the Union and the Company with regard to the status of the field force employees, the locus of the union to represent them etc. This correspondence exchanged between the parties constituted an agreement according to the Union which was binding on both parties. Since 1957, the employees represented by the Union have been treated as workmen by the Company. The company has also recognised the union as the representative of the field force employees. By this Agreement the Union agreed to raise industrial disputes with regard to the service conditions of field force employees on an all India basis. This correspondence exchanged in 1957 constituted an agreement which continued to bind the parties as held by the Apex Court in the case of The Workmen of M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. and others vs. The Management of M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. reported in 1984 (1) LLJ 388.

(3.) AFTER the 1957 agreement several settlements were arrived at between the union and the Company. In the year 1971, a settlement was arrived at between the Union and the Company on various issues including wage scales deems allowance and other allowances payable to the field force employees. This settlement of 1971 was terminated in the year 1973 by the Union. A charter of demands was submitted to the company by the Union on behalf of the field force employees. It appears that in the year 1975, certain unilateral changes were brought about by the Company in the conditions of service of the field force employees, contrary to the 1971 settlement which was based on the 1957 agreement. These changes, according to the Union were arbitrary and adversely affected the workmen. The Union, therefore, filed a Complaint of unfair labour practice under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of the Unfair Labour practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'mrtu and PULP Act')complaining of the illegal change brought about in the emoluments of their members from 1975 onwards by non implementation of the 1957 agreement and the 1971 settlement governing the service conditions of the field force employees. The Industrial Court by an order dated 25th july 1995, held that by withdrawing certain benefits which were available to the workmen under the 1957 agreement and the 1971 settlement, unilaterally, the Company had committed an unfair labour practice. The industrial Court directed the Company to pay the amounts which were deducted and to implement the settlement of 1971. The parties were further directed to negotiate on the 1973 charter of demands which was still pending consideration before the Company.