CHITAVALSAH JUTE MILLS Vs. GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition involves the question as to the scope and ambit of Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act (AP Amendment) (for short 'the ID Act').

(2.) The petitioner (Chitavalsah Jute Mills) is a Division of M/s. Willard India Limited, a registered Company. It is an Industry undertaking manufacture of jute bags and products. Omitting the other minor particulars, the facts that constituted the cause of action for filing the writ petition are as under: -- The petitioner has a membership of its Workers of 5504 reckoned as on 1-3-1990. In accordance with the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, elections were held for the purpose of recognition of majority on 21-1-1991, as per the directions of the Commissioner of Labour. In that election, the 2nd respondent-Union emerged as a majority Union having secured 2429 votes against 1902 votes secured by the 3rd respondent-Union. The 2nd respondent has raised certain demands through letter dated 24-9-1991. It appears that they have gone on strike and the petitioner, in turn, had declared lockout. Conciliation proceedings ensued with the participation of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent and the Conciliation Officer. Ultimately, a settlement dated 12-8-1992 under Section 12(3) of the ID Act was arrived at. With this, the demands/disputes raised by the 2nd respondent stood settled and the settlement was implemented. In view of the settlement, the strike was called off, the lockout was lifted and the Industry started working with effect from 13-8-1992.

(3.) However, on 1-9-1992, the rival Union i.e., the 3rd respondent herein, issued a strike notice expressing its reservations about the utility of some of the items of settlement arrived at between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Anticipating industrial unrest in the petitioner industry, as well as in the area, the 1st respondent i.e., the Government of Andhra Pradesh, in exercise of its powers under Section 10-B of the ID Act, issued orders contained in G.O.Rt.No.l2399 dated 28-11-1992, directing that: