MHH GENERAL KAMGAR UNION Vs. LLAC LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution arise out of an order passed by the Industrial Court on 30th April, 1986 by which two complaints of unfair labour practices under Items 1, 2, 5 and 6 of Schedule II and Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 came to be dismissed.

(2.) The first respondent was engaged in the manufacture of PVC material. Some time prior to 1983, the management closed down its factories purportedly on the ground of adverse import conditions. The Government refused to grant permission for closure under Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. A lay off commenced on 23rd May, 1985 which admittedly was never lifted or withdrawn at any stage. On 29th May, 1985 the company sought permission of the Commissioner of Labour under Section 25-M of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to lay off the workmen with effect from 23rd May, 1985 on the ground of a shortage of electric supply. By an order dated 25th July, 1985 the application was rejected by the Deputy Labour Commissioner on the ground that there was no shortage of electric power and that in fact the company had, despite opportunities, failed to pay the bills of Tata Power Company consequent upon which power supply had been disconnected. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour held that the provisions of Section 25-M were not attracted because there was no shortage of power supply and a disconnected for non-payment of bills could not be equated with a shortage of power supply. The company applied for a reference to the Tribunal but the application was rejected. There was then a suspension of work on 23rd October, 1985 and a lock out was declared with effect from 7th November, 1985.

(3.) The order of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour dated 25th July, 1985 refusing permission to the company to lay off the workmen working in the six factories was challenged in writ proceedings before a Division Bench of this Court. Be a judgment and order dated 7th June, 1985 delivered in Ilac Ltd. v. Union of India,1995 2 CurLR 313 the Division Bench dismissed the petition. The Division Bench, held that the facts of the case indicated that right from the year 1981 attempts were made to close down the company on one pretext or the other. Initially a closure was sought in 1981 on the basis the imports of raw material were not available. Closure permission was refused. The first respondent came on the scene in 1985. The company laid off the workmen on the ground that it was not in a position to pay electricity dues since the electric company had increased fuel charges. Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia (as his Lordship then was) speaking for the Division Bench held that this was not a case involving a shortage of electric supply as contemplated by Section 25-M since it was on account of the nonpayment of electric bills of Tata Power Company that the situation had arisen. The Court that the Deputy Commissioner was not concerned with the plea of the company that the increase in fuel adjustment charges, which were statutory was arbitrary. Moreover, from the record it emerged that both the Government and the electric company had furnished concessions and an opportunity to the company to meet its outstanding dues but, the company had failed to do so upon which electric supply was disconnected. There was a clear and express finding of the Division Bench that the conduct of the management was mala fide and with a view to defeat the entitlement of the workers. The Division Bench held as follows: