- (1.) Decision of the Karnataka High Court is challenged in these appeals. The first respondent, the Amalgamated Electricity Company Ltd., was engaged in supply of electricity in Belgaum city. In the year 1971, there arose some labour dispute. According to the workmen the Company declared a lockout, whereas the management of the first respondent-Company contended that some of the workers had resorted to strike and refused to come for work. By the end December, 1971, the management of the first respondent-Company started the business with about 65 workmen and the other workers were not allowed to join duty. The first respondent-Company contended that these workers were offered employment, but they refused to join duty. Disputes relating to these issues were referred to the Industrial Tribunal and in I.D. No. 11/71, the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, passed an award on 17-2-1978 and it was held that there was no lockout declared by the first respondent-Company. Meanwhile on 18-12-1974, pursuant to the Karnataka Electricity Undertaking (Acquisition) Act, 1974, the management of the first respondent, Amalgamated Electricity Company Ltd., was taken over by the Karnataka Electricity Board whereby all the assets and liabilities of the Amalgamated Electricity Company Ltd. vested with the Karnataka Electricity Board. According to the workmen, 29 employees offered themselves to work with the Karnataka Electricity Board, but they were not allowed to work. The appellant, Karnataka Electricity Board, contended that these workers could not be allowed to join duty in view of the then pending Industrial Dispute. After the passing of the award in I.D. No. 11/71, the workmen again made a demand that they must be permitted to join duty in the Karnataka Electricity Board. However, the workmen were not allowed to join duty and in view of the demand made by the workers, a fresh Reference was made as to whether the management of M/s. Amalgamated Electricity Company Ltd., Belgaum and the Karnataka Electricity Board, were justified in refusing employment to the 29 workmen named therein, with effect from 25-3-1971. The Industrial Tribunal at Hubli passed its award on 6-3-1991. It held that except one worker, K. S. Shinde, who was in gainful employment elsewhere, all other workers were entitled to reinstatement and 50% of the back wages from 7-10-1978 till their reinstatement.
(2.) The award of the Industrial Tribunal was challenged before the High Court and the learned single Judge refused to interfere with the award. In an appeal filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge, the Division Bench also refused to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. Hence these appeals.
(3.) We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Karnataka Electricity Board and also the counsel for the first respondent-Company. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that in view of the earlier Reference, namely, I.D. 11/71, the second Reference was wholly unnecessary and as it was on the same subject matter, the general principles of res judicata would apply. Therefore, he contended that the award passed in I.D. 32/86 is not enforceable in law. The 29 workers were admittedly the workers of the Amalgamated Electricity Company Ltd., which was engaged in the supply of electricity in Belgaum. The counsel for the appellant contended that there was an illegal strike and despite the offer made by the appellant, the workers refused to join duty. The learned counsel for the workmen, on the other hand, contended that there was an illegal lock-out and in spite of the fact that these workers were willing to work, they were denied employment from 25-3-1971 onwards.;