- (1.) The Court : The subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition is an Award dated march 23, 2011 passed by the learned Judge, 4th Industrial Tribunal in Case No. VIII-45/2004.
(2.) The principal issue which cropped up for consideration in the industrial dispute before the tribunal below was whether the management of the writ petitioner was justified in changing the existing Service Rules of 1969 by new Service Rules of 1984.
(3.) The company had its factories in Guwahati and Hyderabad and had its corporate office in Kolkata. The service conditions of the workmen were guided by the General Service Rules of the company of 1969 along with periodical terms of settlement. The workmen represented by the union were aware of the facts of the General Service Rules of 1969. After the implementation of those rules appointment letters to different employees were issued. So far as one Sri Aditya Kumar Das is concerned there was dispute relating to the age of his retirement. It appears that the company circulated another service rules of 1984 for the Calcutta through a Memo dated January 30, 1997. The grievance of the workmen is that the company at no point of time intimated them that another service rule of the company was in existence. The company, in fact, always relied on the 1969 Rules and the settlements were also arrived at in terms thereof. Several instances of post 1984 appointments have been cited where it was particularly mentioned that service would be governed by the 1969 Rules. The further grievance of the workmen was that the 1984 Rules were prepared without the consent of the workmen represented by the union which amounted to contravening the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act, for short). The new Rules of 1984 aimed at curtailing the age long right and service protection benefits of the workmen which they had been enjoying under the 1969 Rules. The real areas of difference between the existing service benefits under the old rules and the new rules have been tabled under the Award impugned. Since the company was unwilling to accede to the demands of the workmen it raised an industrial dispute and ultimately it resulted in a reference.;