other persons who are confined the petitioner-company had to effect a lockout in all departments with immediate effect from 1st January 2001. Then there ... referring the dispute between the parties, namely, whether the lockout dated 1.1.2001 declared by the Management is legal, acceptable, for adjudication to the labour court
wherein the award in so far as it relates to declaration of lockout to be unjustified and grant of wages for the said period ... started right from the middle of October 1983 by the workmen. A lockout was declared with effect from December 24, 1983 and the dispute
whether
the strike at the Delhi Cloth Mills and the lockout declared
by the management on 24-2-1966 are justified and legal
and whether ... workmen are entitled to wages for the
period of lockout?". The Supreme Court has, in
paragraphs No.8, 9, 18 and 25, on which
finished goods and also raw materials on Sunday, the
16.3.2014 declared a lockout of the factory in the early
morning on 17.3.2014. In the lockout ... fixed on 1.4.2014. The workers peacefully
protested the illegal and unjustified lockout with the hope the
Management would attend the meeting on 01.04.2014 and
settle
under
second head are;
(a) with respect to the legality of the lockout
declared on 21.08.1994;
(b) alleged willful abstinence from work by the
workmen ... after the petitioner-Establishment lifted the
lockout with effect from 13.12.1994, and
(c) wages payable for the period from 20.08.1994 to
13.12.1994 and upto
extracted above reads :
"The management was not justified in declaring a lockout on 5 June 1958."
12. I have found great difficulty ... labour court was able to reach the conclusion that there was a lockout by the management and that the petitioner was not justified in declaring
Writ Petition that the Second Party -
Management, illegally issued the order of lockout from
28.09.2015 and the Second Party - Management has linked the
issue ... Charter of Demands for declaring lockout without issuing
prior notice to the First Party - Union. It is further stated in the
claim petition that
ORDER DATED 10.04.2012 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND REPLACE IT BY THE WORDS LOCKOUT OF THE
FACTORY BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT MANAGEMENT.
-3-
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ... dated 10.04.2012 at
Annexure-P passed by respondent No.1 prohibiting the
lockout.
2. W.P. No.28183/2013 is preferred by the Parle
Workers
ORDER DATED 10.04.2012 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND REPLACE IT BY THE WORDS LOCKOUT OF THE
FACTORY BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT MANAGEMENT.
-3-
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ... dated 10.04.2012 at
Annexure-P passed by respondent No.1 prohibiting the
lockout.
2. W.P. No.28183/2013 is preferred by the Parle
Workers
second respondent and its directors to improve the situation, the frequent strikes, lockouts and suspension of work in the unit and also ... decreased production and reduction in the utilisation of installed capacity. There were lockouts, strikes and suspension of operations for nearly 18 months. This worsened
