- (1.) In this writ petition an award passed by the learned Fourth Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata is under challenge. The issues before the Tribunal were as follows: 1) Revision of Grades and Scales of Pay. 2) Revision of attendance-cum-tiffin allowance. 3) Revision of travelling allowance. 4) Introduction of variable dearness allowance.
(2.) Therefore, the Tribunal had no other alternative to come to a definite conclusion in respect of such issues but, according to me, the Tribunal had proceeded on a wrong track. The Tribunal held that a Memorandum of Settlement which is charter of demand vide Exhibit G was made by the Company under reference in collusion with the new executive committee which came out from the parent union under reference and the same has violated the principles of natural justice and the same is not binding upon the union under reference at whose instance reference was made. Further in the concluded portion a militating effect is apparent which is as follows: "the company had legal obligation to consider the same. As such the company is directed to give effect the charter of demand vide Exhibit 7 in respect of the issues mentioned in the reference immediately with effect from April 1.1999".
(3.) Prima facie, it appears to me that if the Company 33is directed to consider the charter of demand, no direction can be made upon such management to accept the charter of demand. Therefore, this part is totally perverse in nature. So far the earlier observation is concerned whenever a Judge sits in the Tribunal on such type of issues regarding charter of demand which is normally finalised in between the parties by a Bipartite Agreement the intervention of the authority by a tripartite agreement should not be taken up by with an outlook of dispute between management and workmen and/or trade union so that in future the dispute persists. Court/Tribunal has to behave like mediator, there is a gulf difference between difference and dispute. This stage in an earlier stage which should not be looked out from the angle of dispute. Hence, in such type of settlement it would have been appropriate for the Tribunal to send a notice to the workmen who are the parties to the Memorandum of Settlement already executed so that they can come forward: before the Court and can state as to what is the fate of the present charter of demand. It has to be considered by the Tribunal to verify the benefit and loss of the workmen. If it appears that under the earlier charter of demand the present workmen are not getting adequate benefit at par with the employees under Memorandum of Settlement then obviously the Tribunal would come to such conclusion to give effect to such portions which are beneficial for the purpose of the workmen; instead of creating more disputes in between the management and workmen by making costly remarks.;