GARLICK ENGINEERING Vs. SURESH H. KARALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present Petitions instituted under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners call in question the legality and correctness of the judgment and order dtd. 17/1/2019 passed by the Industrial Court at Thane in Complaint (ULP) No. 79 of 2013. By the said order, the Industrial Court has partly allowed the complaint and has recorded a finding that the Respondents have indulged in unfair labour practices falling under Item 5 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The Industrial Court has further directed the Respondents to pay lockout wages to the Complainants for the period commencing from 23/9/1992 up to the respective dates of resignation or acceptance of Voluntary Retirement Scheme, within a period of three months, with a stipulation that in default, the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of the order till its realization.

(2.) The factual matrix giving rise to the present Petitions may be briefly stated thus. The Petitioner was an undertaking of M/s. Empire Industries Limited and was engaged in the manufacture of EOT cranes at its factory situated at Thane. The Respondents herein were in the employment of the Petitioner. It is the case of the Petitioner that owing to certain coercive, obstructive and disruptive acts on the part of the workmen, it was constrained to declare a lockout and suspend the operations of the factory with effect from 23/9/1992. As no amicable settlement could be reached between the parties, the demands raised by the Union came to be referred for adjudication by the State Government. On the very same date, namely 23/9/1992, the State Government issued a prohibitory order restraining continuation of the lockout. The said order was challenged by the Petitioner by instituting Writ Petition No. 6051 of 1995 before this Court, which was admitted and interim relief was granted, but ultimately came to be dismissed by order dtd. 9/2/2001. The Petitioner thereafter preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 70 of 2001, which was initially entertained with continuation of interim relief, but the same also came to be dismissed by order dtd. 1/4/2005.

(3.) During the pendency of the industrial disputes, the Petitioner introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme applicable to workmen between the ages of 50 and 58 years. Under the said scheme, the workmen opting for voluntary retirement were required to submit their resignations and, upon acceptance thereof, were made entitled to receive wages for the months of July, August and September 1991, encashment of privilege leave, gratuity in accordance with law, provident fund accumulations, and an ex gratia payment computed at the rate of 30 days' wages for each completed year of service. It is an admitted position that all workmen, except 60, availed the benefits of the said scheme and accepted the amounts in full and final settlement of their claims without raising any protest or reservation.