S.K.Keshote, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Unit Pipraich. The Corporation manufactures at its said unit sugar by vacuum pan process. The conditions of service of the workmen employed in vacuum pan sugar factories in the State of U.P. are being regulated by the standing orders framed in exercise of the power conferred by Section 3 of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as the Act, 1947). The relevant standing orders were published by notification dated October 3, 1958.
(2.) 80 Workmen in number which includes the respondents No. 2 to 13 worked throughout the season 1974-75 in the factory of the petitioner at Pipraich. Though all of these workmen were performing the job directly connected with the manufacturing process and they reported for duty on December 2, 1975 crushing season 1975- 76 but they were not allowed to resume their duties. When all efforts failed an industrial dispute has been raised by the Union. The conciliation proceedings failed, as such the State of U.P. vide its notification dated December 8, 1977 made a reference of the dispute under Section 4-K of the Act, 1947. The Industrial Tribunal (iv) U.P. at Lucknow registered the dispute as Adjudication Case No. 162 of 1977. The reference has been decided by the Industrial Tribunal and award has been passed therein on November 28, 1980 and out of 80 workmen claim of 13 workmen i.e. respondent Nos. 2 to 13 has been accepted. The operative part of the award reads as under: "10. The next point that arise is to what relief the above workmen are entitled. There is nothing to show that the employers had not the financial capacity to bear the burden of the payment of the retaining allowance. The retaining allowance is paid to seasonal workmen in order to enable the workmen to tide over the period of the unemployment. The workmen shall be entitled to get retaining allowance for the off season 1974-75 and further they shall be entitled to one month's wages as compensation with respect to non-employment in 1975-76. The crushing season had lasted for two months only in that year. As regards their claim that the employer should be directed to take them in subsequent season as workmen, it cannot be granted in those terms. Those who actually worked in the crushing season 1975-76 would be entitled to preference over those to whom the retaining allowance and compensation had been awarded will have preference over new man provided they applied for employment. The right to re-employment during any season accrues to a workman only if he had worked in the factory during the preceding seasons and, therefore, those who had actually worked in the factory in 1975-76 would have preference over the workmen to whom retaining allowance and compensation is paid. For the above the reference is decided in these terms (a) Mahendra, Nav Ratan Sant, Hari Prasad s/o Algoo, Bikay, Ram Prit and Mithai were the seasonal employees of the Corporation during the crushing season 1974-75 working as Donga Coolies and Krishna Murari, Sudama, Ram Jeet, Ram Deo, Lal Bahadur, Safrul Haq were the boiler coolies employed by the Corporation during the crushing season 1974-75. In the next season they had offered themselves to the company to employ them as such but the company without any jurisdiction refused to employ them. The said workmen are entitled to the retaining allowance admissible to the workmen of their category for the off season 1974-75. They will also get one month's wages as compensation on the rate admissible to the workmen of their category during the crushing season 1975-76. Those who actually worked in 1975-76 would be entitled to preference over these workmen, but if there are vacancies these workmen will have preference over the new men provided they apply for employment in the factory in the succeeding seasons. In the circumstances no order as to cost is made." (b) The claim of the workmen other than those specified in the above stands dismissed. 11. Let a copy of this award be sent to the State Government for information and necessary action."
(3.) The award dated November 28, 1980 has partly been complied with by the petitioner. The respondent Nos. 2 to 13 have been paid retaining allowance admissible to their category for off season 1974-75. They have also been paid one month wages as compensation on the rate admissible to those of their category for the crushing season 1975-76. The award dated November 28, 1980 has not been challenged by the petitioner and as such it attained finality. The Employees Union, Pipraich Gorakhpur filed a special leave petition before the Apex Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India against the award to the extent it relates to the rejection of the claim of 67 workmen. The said S.L.P. has been dismissed on September 5, 1983. As the part of the award was not complied with an application under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 has been filed before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur by the respondent Nos. 2 to 13 on June 19, 1984. In the application it has been stated that the employer, the petitioner, has made many new appointments during the crushing season 1976-77 but they were not taken in service despite of the fact that they were available for the employment. Similarly they were not taken in employment in the seasons 1977-78 to 1983-84 though they made request to the management from time to time in all seasons. A detailed reply to the said application has been filed. A rejoinder to reply which has been filed by the petitioner has also been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 13. Both oral and documentary evidence have been produced before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur by the parties in support of their respective cases. In the oral evidence the statement from the side of workmen Shri Bans Bahadur Singh (S.W. 1) Nav Ratan (SW 2) and Krishna Murari (SW 3) were recorded. From their side the copy of the applications which have been submitted by them to the management for taking them in the employment have been produced. From the side of the management in the oral evidence the statement of Shri Kripa Shanker Srivastava were recorded as W-1. The learned Labour Court, Gorakhpur vide its order dated August 22, 1985 decided the application filed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 13. It has been held that new appointments have been made in the crushing seasons of 1975-76 to 1977-78 and despite of the reported request made by these workmen they were not taken in the employment and as such the award has not been complied with. The petitioners were held to be entitled for the benefits of wages, bonus and retaining allowance as claimed by them. The Labour Court has ordered for payment of Rs. 19,199.30 as wages, Rs. 1,682.84 as bonus, Rs. 2,498.13 as retaining allowance to each of the workmen. The petitioner filed this writ petition before this Court against the order of the Labour Court, Gorakhpur dated August 28, 1985 and prayed therein for quashing of the same. A counter-affidavit has been filed of Shri M.P. Singh on behalf of the respondent No. 1.A counter affidavit of Shri Narrotam, respondent No. 3, has been filed in the present case and contested the claim of the petitioner. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No. 3 along with which 7 documents have been enclosed. A rejoinder to the counter-affidavit is filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed a supplementary -affidavit along with which a document has also been filed. The writ petition has been admitted by this Court on November 15, 1985. On the same day the operation of the order dated August 22, 1985 passed by the Labour Court, Gorakhpur has been stayed. The ad-interim stay order dated November 15, 1985 has been modified by this Court on March 24, 1985 and the order of the Labour Court dated August 22, 1985 was stayed on the condition that the petitioner shall deposit 1/4 of the amount due under the said order with the Labour Court, Gorakhpur within one month from the said date. The respondent Nos. 2 to 13 given liberty to withdraw the said amount on furnishing of security to the satisfaction of the Labour Court. Under the aforesaid order the amount of Rs. 70,144.00 has been deposited by the petitioner in the Labour Court and this amount has already been withdrawn by the respondent Nos. 2 to 13. These facts do come out from the documents which have been filed by the parties in the writ petition.;