Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, at the stage of admission itself, by consent of Mr. Vaidya, learned counsel for the Petitioner; Mrs. Desai, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2; Ms. Patil, learned counsel for Respondent No.3; and Mrs. Bane, learned A.G.P., for Respondent No.4-State.

2. By this Writ Petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court to quash and set aside the orders dated 18 th December 2017, passed by Respondent No.2, thereby granting the rise in the pay-scale of the Mathadi Workers engaged on contractual basis in Toli Nos.76 and 79.

3. Petitioner is an 'Industrial Establishment', engaged in manufacture of glass bottles. Petitioner employs about 325 permanent employees and WP-2295-18.doc 700 employees on the contract basis. Permanent employees are associate with Nashik Workers' Union, affiliated to CITU. It is a registered Union and Petitioner has signed several settlements in respect of service conditions of its employees with the said Union. Last such settlement was terminated on 30th January 2015. Thereafter, Petitioner has signed a separate settlement with the permanent employees. As regards the contractual employees, though Respondent No.3-the Union has submitted a 'Charter of Demand' dated 1 st October 2015, seeking revision in the service conditions of those Mathadi Workers, Petitioner found that the demands made by Respondent No.3-Union were exorbitant, seeking nearly double the wages that were prevailing in the erstwhile settlement. Hence, the Petitioner could not accept the same. The several meetings were held by the Petitioner with Respondent No.3-Union to arrive at some settlement. In those meetings, the Petitioner has pointed out as to how the Company was facing accumulated losses over the last four years to the extent of Rs.647 Crores, which has resulted in the erosion of more than 50% of the net-worth of Rs.140 Crores. It was also informed to Respondent No.3-Union that, the Petitioner-Company was, therefore, likely to be declared as a potentially sick Company under the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985.

5. Per contra, Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have, vide their affidavit-in- reply, supported the said wage increase by pointing out to the rates of inflation and the hard manual work, which the Mathadi Workers of Toli Nos.76 and 79 are required to undertake. It is submitted that, the Petitioner has already entered into the 'Memorandum of Understanding', dated 28th April 2017, with the direct and permanent workers, thereby accepting its liability to pay the wages at the enhanced rate. However, as regards the contractual workers of Toli Nos.76 and 79, the Petitioner is avoiding to do so; though they also require the same increase in their wages. It is submitted that, Respondent No.3-Union, having regard to the alleged financial condition of the Petitioner-Company, has granted increase, only to the extent of 6% to 10% and, that too, on graded basis. WP-2295-18.doc Even the arrears of one year, out of the three years, have not been granted. Thus, it is submitted that, the increase granted by Respondent No.3-Union in the wages of these workers being fair, reasonable and at par with the permanent workers, no interference is warranted in the impugned orders.