SARKAR, J. - (1.) THE appellant is a union of the workmen of the Indian Aluminium Co., Ltd., the respondent in this appeal. The appeal concerns certain Industrial disputes. The question raised Is whether the order of reference of these disputes under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was competent.
(2.) IT appears that on 28 March 1951, the Government of the State of Travancore-Cochin which later became the State of Kerala, made under the Act two orders of reference of certain Industrial disputes between the company and its workmen. The first order of reference concerned disputes between the company and its workmen, represented by a union called the factory staff association and the second concerned disputes between the company and its workmen represented by the appellant union. After various proceedings these disputes were settled and awards by the industrial tribunal concerned wore made on 19 January 1952 in terms of settlements arrived at. In the case in which the staff association was concerned, the dispute referred included two points, namely : (1) Was the refusal to promote pot room supervisor P. C. Markose as foreman unjust ? and (2) Does the transfer of M. P. Mathai and C. A. Augustine from the pot room department to the chemical laboratory amount to alteration of the conditions of service to the prejudice of pot room supervisors ? The settlement with regard to the first of these disputes was in these terms : "The Principle that supervisors and other employees in the company above their grade are not workmen within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 Is accepted and accordingly, the Indian aluminium factory staff association undertakes forthwith to exclude all such employees from their membership and inform the fact to the employers in writing. On receipt of the same, the employers shall promote P. C. Markose as a foreman effective from 1 October 1951 on a foreman's initial basic salary plus rupees twenty-five." The dispute concerning Mathai and Augustine was given up by the settlement.In the second reference in which the appellant union was involved, two of the terms agreed to were as follows : "(1) The principle that supervisors and other employees in the company above their grade are not workmen within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is accepted and accordingly the aluminium factory workers' union undertakes to exclude all such employees from their membership. (2) The employers agree to make an ex-gratia payment of rupees twenty each to all workers whose basic wage is rupees one hundred and fifty per month or less on 31 December 1951." It is quite obvious that the two references were settled together by one scheme of agreement, and formed one connected whole, the settlement in each case being a consideration for the other.
(3.) SOMETIME after the aforesaid awards, the said Mathai was discharged and thereupon the appellant union raised an industrial dispute concerning it. On 14 July 1954, the Government of Travancore-Cochin made an order under S.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referring for adjudication the question whether the discharge of Mathai was justiflable and if not, to what relief he was entitled, to the industrial tribunal, Ernakulam.;