NARENDRA MOHAN KASLIWAL, J. - (1.) THIS special appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated January 23, 1981 in Civil Writ Petition No. 1864/1984.
(2.) BICHHU Ram and Shersingh (here in after referred to as ('the respondents') filed a petition under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (here in after referred to as 'the Act') against M/s Rohtas Industies Ltd. (here in after referred to as the appellant before the Labour Court, Jaipur. The case of the respondents before the Labour Court was that they had joined service with the appellant in the year 1970 and 1974. In accordance with the settlement arrived at between the appellant and M/s Rohtas Industries Labour Union on December, 5 1976, bonus ex -gratia was allowed to be paid to the workmen @ 17 per cent of the total wage earned during the years 1977 and 1978. As the above bonus ex -gratia was not paid to the respondents as such Bichu Ram nude a claim of Rs. 867/ - and Sher Singh made a claim of Rs. 393.72. The case of the appellant before the Labour Court was that Bichu Ram and Sher Singh respondents had already left the service of the appellant by tendering resignations voluntarily on March 23, 1978 and June 5, 1978 respectively. It is submitted that at the time of accepting their resignations entire dues were settled and no demand remained to be paid to these persons. It was further submitted that these persons were not workmen of the appellant when the above mentioned settlement dt. Dec. 5,1978 was arrived at between the appellant and the Union. The Labour Court held that according to the language of the settlement dated December 5, 1978, there was nothing to debar these workmen from deriving the benefit solely on account of the fact that they were not workmen on December 5, 1978. It was further held by the Labour Court that in India a stranger to a consideration can enforce a contract otherwise valid and may claim for his benefit. The settlement dated December 5, 1978 is one where the respondents were not parties. Certain advantages were conferred on the respondents under the settlement and they can reap their fruits. In the result, a sum of Rs. 867/ - in favour of Bichhu Ram and Rs. 383/72 in favour of Sher Singh were computed to be due to them from the appellant. Aggrieved against the order of the Labour Court the appellant filed a writ petition. Learned Single Judge, also took the view that there is no clause in the agreement that those workmen, who had ceased to be workmen at the time of settlement would not get the benefit of 17 percent ex -gratia bonus. The settlement was arrived at on December 5, 1978. The notice giving charter of demands was given on June 19, 1978. According to the terms of the settlement which was based on the charter of demands the workmen wanted certain benefits and the respondents were entitled to those benefits. Learned Single Judge also held that the argument made by learned Counsel for the appellant that the definition of 'workmen' excluded those workmen, who had resigned or voluntarily left the service had no relevancy so far the application under Section 33C(2) of the Act is concerned. It was further observed that the settlement arrived at was not between the individual workmen and the management, but it was between the Union and the management. Such a settlement would thus entitle all persons to take benefit in terms of settlement. Learned Single Judge also observed that a very petty amount has been allowed to the respondents and it would meet the ends of justice if these two workmen, who are low paid employees are not dragged in the law courts at this stage. The writ petition as such was dismissed in limine.
(3.) AGGRIEVED against the order of the learned Single Judge, this special appeal has been filed by M/s Rohtas Industries Ltd.;