Judgment

GOSWAMI, J.;- This appeal by special leave brings forth a rather disquieting feature of union rivalry whereby the significance of collective bargaining, which is the forte of a union, is sought to be made a flop. We say this in the absence of any suggestion to mala fides or of any other ulterior motive alleged by the contending union on the part of the rival union or its principal officer who had negotiated a certain settlement on behalf of the workmen in substitution of the award of the Industrial Tribunal out of which this appeal arose.

2. The appellant before us is the employer, supported, wholehog, by the Bombay General Kamgar Sabha, respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 2 is the only contending union, viz., Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha.

3. On May 18, 1967, there was a reference by the Government of Maharashtra of an industrial dispute under Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudicating eight demands such as, wage scales, adjustment of increments, classification of workmen into different grades, dearness allowance, retrospective effect of the claim from 1st June, 1966, gratuity, sick leave and wages for Sundays and holidays when called upon to work. The dispute was between the D & P Products (Private) Limited, Bombay and their workmen. A written statement was submitted by the Mumbai Mazdoor Sabha (2nd respondent) claiming to represent the majority of the workmen on July 25, 1967. It appears that this written statement was signed by V. S. Pandit as General Secretary. The company submitted their written statement on August 17, 1967, in which, inter alia, they pleaded incapacity to have greater burden on account of financial position. It was stated that the company had been making losses year after year since 1963-64.

4. During the pendency of the dispute before the Tribunal, D & P Products (Private) Limited was amalgamated with Herbertsons Ltd. (the appellant) hereinafter to be described as the company) with effect from 1-10-1968 under the provisions of the Companies Act by an order of the Bombay High Court dated 6th January, 1969.

5. The wage scales existing at the time of reference were as follows:-

Unskilled Rs. 1.25-0 10-2.25

Semi-skilled Rs. 1.50-0 15-3.00

Dearness allowance Rs. 2.16 per day.

6. The demand of the workmen on the other hand was as follows:-

Unskilled Rs. 1.50-0. 15-3.00 per day

Semi-skilled Rs. 1.75-0 20-3.75 " "

Skilled Rs. 2.50-0 30-5.50 " "

Highly-skilled Rs. 3.50-0 45-8.00 " "

Dearness allowance "as paid to the Bombay Textile Operatives."

7. The Tribunal (Shri R. D. Tulpule) made its award on March 4, 1970. As regards the demand for wages and dearness allowance, the award of Tribunal was as follows:-

Grade I Rs. Plus Revised

(Unskilled) 1 30.0, 12 2.50 Textile dearness allowance.

Grade II

B (Semi-skilled) 1 40.0, 15 3.20 do.

A (Semi-skilled) 1 60.0, 20 3.60 do.

Grade III

(Skilled) 1 80.0, 20 2.80.0 25 4.80 do.

8. The company preferred an application for special leave to this Court on May 12, 1970, against the award. On May 25, 1970, certain consent terms for staying the award were filed by the parties without prejudice to the rights in the appeal whereby the company agreed to pay Rs. 2.50 as additional dearness allowance per day from October 1, 1968. This Court admitted the special leave petition and posted the stay application for hearing on September 24, 1970, on which date in modification of the earlier stay order the parties further agreed that from 1st September, 1970, till the disposal of the appeal, the total dearness allowance would be calculated at Rs. 5/- per day irrespective of the index figures. On February 22, 1973, the company agreed to increase the dearness allowance further by 80 paise with effect from January 1, 1973.

9. From June 1973 certain new developments took place. On June 7, 1973, a letter was received by the company from the 3rd respondent, Bombay General Kamgar Sabha, stating that all the workers of the company had resigned from the 2nd respo