- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) By the impugned Award dated 09.05.2011 [Annexure -5] passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 51 of 2000, the following reference "Whether the action of M/s. BCCL, Kusunda Area management in not absorbing the female 35 workers or their nominated alternate males is in violation of the bi -partite agreement arrived at between the management and the Union If so, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled - has been answered in the following terms: "9. Considering the above facts and circumstances, I hold that the management is not justified in not implementing the agreement with the union regarding giving employment to the female 35 workers or their nominated alternate males, such as, their husband/ son/ son -in -law. The management of M/s. BCCL is directed to implement the agreement dated 09.12.80 and give employment to the female 35 workers or their nominated alternate males, husband/ son/ son -in -law within 30 days from the date of publication of the award. This is my Award."
(3.) The substratum of the case is that workmen herein raised their grievance under an Agreement dated 09.12.1980 between Management and Union, para -2 whereof is also quoted in the impugned Award and is extracted as under: - "2. Those female workers who have got 75 days or more attendances during the year 1973 to 1976, their husband/ son/ son -in -law shall be taken into employment as Badli Miner/ Loader, as per Company's policy and subject to their physical fitness. The names of such female workers who have 75 or more days attendance during the period 1973 ­ 76, is attached as "B". The workmen set up a case before the Management leading to reference of industrial dispute that these 35 female workers or their nominated alternate males have not been absorbed by M/s. BCCL in terms of the bipartite agreement. ;