HARNAM CHAND Vs. MANAGEMENT PUNJAB UNIVERSITY PRINTING PRESS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT would be ex-pedient to collate the facts leading to this appeal. The appellants preferred a petition under Section 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming that while they were working as Compositors at the Punjab University Printing Press, a settlement took place between Employees' Union and the Punjab University to the effect that the workers of the Punjab University Printing Press will be given grades as in force in the Union Territory Press, Chandigarh, from time to time, and the revision of the grades will not adversely affect the emoluments of the workers then prevalent in the Punjab University Printing Press. It was further agreed that in case any worker wanted to retain the existing grade he will have the option to do so. It was averred that at the time the settlement was arrived at there was one cadre of Compositors in the pay scale of Rs. 100-5-150 in the Press, and the petitioners were working in that cadre arrived at and while there were two cadres of Compositors, i. e. Junior Compositors and Senior Compositors in the Union Territory Press. Their grades were Rs. 100-4-140/5-160 and Rs. 120-5-150/6-180/8- 220/10-250 respectively. There was no equation of the post of Compositor of the Punjab University Printing Press with either of the two cadres of the Compositors in the Union Territory Press. The petitioners claimed wages in the grade of Rs. 120-5-150/6- 180/8-220/10-250, i. e. the grade of Senior Compositor as applicable in the Union Territory Press.

(2.) THE respondents refuted the claim. It was averred that the Senate of the Punjab University, designated the posts of the Compositors of the Punjab University Printing Press as Junior Compositors and as there was a dispute with respect to the status of the claimants and the dispute being squarely covered by Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, could only be determined by the Industrial Tribunal, and the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to determine the status of the claimants. The Labour Court's jurisdiction under Section 33c (2) of the Act to determine the status of claimants was challenged. Various other objections were raised which are not relevant for the purpose of determining the question raised in this appeal.

(3.) THE Labour Court found that since the settlement did not equate posts of the claimants with the posts of Senior Compositors, the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to decide the same in proceedings under Section 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act as the proceedings are in the nature of execution and since the claim was with respect to the nature of status of the claimants the parties may approach the Industrial Tribunal. The claim application was dismissed.