Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This writ petition has been filed by the Company under liquidation through the authorized signatory of the liquidator against the following respondent:

"1. State of U.P. through State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary, Labout Department, Government of U.P. Secretariate, Bapu Bhawan, Lucknow
2. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal(III), Kanpur,Uttar Pradesh
3. LML Mazdoor Ekta Sangathan F-679, Barra-8, Kanpur"

The prayer in the petition is for quashing/setting aside the award dated 19.2.2020 published on 12.3.2020 made by the Industrial Tribunal. Further relief has been sought for restraining the respondents from proceedings against the petitioner-company pursuant to the aforesaid award.

The workmen of the petitioner-Company resorted to strikes and demonstrations with effect from 27.2.2006, which paralyzed its functioning and a lockout was declared with effect from 7.3.2006. In order to salvage the Company's business, the management of the Company and its workmen represented by the registered union of the Company namely Lohia Machines (LML) Karmchari Sangh3, engaged in protracted tripartite discussions and arrived at settlement on 13.4.2007 before the Additional Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region, Conciliation Officer and Additional Labour Commissioner (IR) U.P., Head Office Kanpur. It is stated that since the inception of the petitioner-Company, and at the time of the negotiations, the interests of the workmen were represented solely by LMLKS. In terms of the aforesaid settlement, it was decided that the workmen would withdraw the strike and the lockout would be lifted with effect from 15.4.2007; that the petitioner-Company will take steps to revive the establishment and only such number of workmen shall be taken on work and employment in phases as per requirement of work and production as far as on departmental seniority basis, and all other workmen, save and except those who were required to resume work and production, shall stand laid off. The settlement further provided that the laid off workmen would be entitled to receive lay off compensation in the manner specified.

The memorandum of settlement dated 13.04.2007, that is the bone of contention between the contesting parties, has been enclosed as Annexure No.4 to the writ petition. It is made in Form-1 and under Section 4-F of the U.P. Act read with Rule 5(1) of the U.P. Rules. The names of the parties and their addresses are mentioned as M/s. LML Limited, Scooter Unit, Site-II, C-10, Panki Industrial Estate, Kanpur (Company) and the workmen through their Union - Lohia Machines (LML) Karmchari Sangh, 117/533, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur. The representatives of the employer were (1) Shri R.K. Srivastava, Whole time Director, and (2) Shri K.P. Tripathi, Divisional Manager (P&IR). The representatives of the workmen are 15 in numbers headed by the acting President. In the recital of the case appearing in the settlement, it is narrated that the company's performance during the previous two years had been adversely affected due to the drastic shift in the market from geared scooters to motorcycles; and inspite of significant efforts, the company could achieve only partial financial restructuring in the year 2005 and could not obtain fresh working capital facilities with the result that liquidity constraints and high break even point continued to adversely affect the performance of the company causing it to incur heavy losses; due to strikes and demonstrations by the workmen with effect from 27.02.2006, the company's working was completely paralysed and lock-out was declared on 07.03.2006 which was continuing; as a result of huge losses of approximately Rs.411.44 crores, the company's net worth had been fully eroded and the company filed a reference before the BIFR under the provisions of SICA. The recital further narrates that for resolving various issues, a tripartite meeting had taken place before the Additional Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region as well as the Additional Labour Commissioner, U.P. (I.R) which culminating in execution of a tripartite settlement dated 24.07.2006 in pursuance of which settlement, the Management had disbursed wages to the workmen for January and February 2006 which was accepted in full. In view of the extremely precarious financial position of the company, its business plan had to be totally recasted and with a view to revive the Unit, the company would favourably consider to restart its scooter operations on a limited scale, primarily for the export market. The parties agreed for the downsizing of manpower and all other measures, as may be required at the sole discretion of the management, would be adopted to make the Unit viable so as to ensure its survival and revival, and bring the company back to a position of sustained profitability. It is mentioned in the recital that the company would need time to complete the process required for formulation, consideration and approval of the revival package which, inter alia, would involve induction of fresh funds from financial/strategic investors, settlement/restructuring of liability etc. It was recognised by the parties that it is in the interest of the company and workmen that the company resumes its operations as contemplated for manufacture and export of scooters and also time would be needed by the company thereafter for formulation, consideration and approval of the revival package by the BIFR. It was finally mentioned in the recital that after meeting between the management and the office bearers of the registered and recognised Union working in the company, a tripartite meeting had taken place on 13.04.2007 before the Additional Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region, Kanpur and the Additional Labour Commissioner, U.P. (I.R) head office at Kanpur wherein the following settlement had been arrived at between the parties with their consent. The 11 clauses of the terms of the settlement are as follows:-

At the end of the aforesaid memorandum of settlement, the representatives of the employers and the 15 representatives of the workmen have signed in the presence of Additional Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region, Kanpur as well as the Additional Labour Commissioner, U.P. (I.R) Kanpur.

Before considering the aforesaid settlement with regard to lay-off and the award of the Industrial Tribunal on this aspect, it may be mentioned that in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-Union, a copy of the certified Standing Orders dated 27.08.1984 has been enclosed as Annexure-CA-1 framed under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. This document has not been specifically denied in the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner-company. The provisions of lay-off of workmen, payment of compensation, and maintenance of muster rolls are mentioned in clauses 19, 20 and 21 respectively of the aforesaid Standing Orders. They are quoted below:-