GARMENT CLEANING WORKS Vs. D M ANEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the decision of the Industrial Tribunal given on a preliminary objection in an industrial reference. The short facts leading to this reference are as follows:

(2.) THE petitioner is doing laundry business in partnership. It employs about eight hundred workers in different departments and different branches. An industrial dispute was raised by a section of the workers regarding the scales of pay, classification, dearness allowance etc. and the said dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 195 of 1962. A similar dispute was raised by other section of the workers of the said firm and it was referred to the Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 12 of 1963. At this time the Union which took up the cause of the workers was the Laundry Mazdoor Sabha. Thereafter, another Union sprang up called the Bombay General Employees Association. This Association made applications for making it a party to the References. Accordingly, this Association also was made a party to the said Referen-ces. The usual procedure in the Reference was followed. No other worker or Union appeared during the conduct of the References. Thereafter settlements were arrived at in both the References between the petitioner and the Unions. The settlements were signed by the employer and the representative of each of the Unions in each of the References. They also appear to have been signed by the counsel for the workmen as shown by the annexures to the present petition. By these settlements all matters which were then pending before the Tribunal including some others were settled. The settlements were filed on October 22, 1964. The Tribunal after stating the demands etc. made the following order by paragraph 4 of its award dated November 2, 1964 in Reference No. 105 of 1962: "in the result I make an award in terms of the settlement marked as Annexure 'p', so far as it relates to the subject matter of the Reference. " Similarly, in the other Reference after reciting the demands the Tribunal says:

(3.) THE present Union, respondent No. 2, which came on the scene later, by its notices terminated the first award on February 14, 1966 and the second award on May 22, 1966. Thereafter, it submitted fresh demands on October 5, 1966. These demands related to dearness allowance and increase in piece rate payment with retrospective effect. This dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal by Reference (IT) No. 306 of 1967.