SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTH CARE LIMITED RAJAHMUNDRY EAST Vs. S B C B LIMITED OPERATORS AND WORKERS UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ appeals are directed against the same judgment of the learned single Judge dated 4-8-1998 in writ petition No. 17556 of 1994. Writ Appeal No. 1590 of 1998 is filed by M/s. Smithkline Beecham Consumer Health. Care Ltd - the 2nd respondent in the writ petition whereas Writ Appeal No. 1599 of 1998 is by H.M.M.Ltd (Horlicks) Workers Union - the 5th respondent in the writ petition.

(2.) Writ Petition No. 17556 of 1994 was filed by S.B.C.B. Ltd Operators and Workers Union - the 1st respondent in the writ appeals for the following relief: Under the circumstances, we pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of Constitution of India, particularly one in the nature of the writ of certiorari, quashing the award passed by the 4th respondent herein in I.T.I.D.No. 4/92 dt. 29-7-1994 as unjust and illegal after calling for the records.

(3.) Although initially the above relief was sought in the writ petition, subsequently the petitioner filed W.P.M.P.No. 28674 of 1995 seeking amendment to the prayer by way of substitution of a new prayer which was ordered by the learned single Judge on 19-10-1995. The prayer as amended reads as follows: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or orders under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the clause 10 of the settlement to the extent of authorising the management to deduct Rs. 3,000/- out of an ad hoc amount of Rs. 13,500/- for paying to the 5th respondent union is quite unfair, unjust and unfair labour practice in place of para 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition.