A settlement arrived at under Section 12 (3) read with Section 18 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is binding on all workmen, irrespective of whether they are parties to the settlement or members of the union that espoused the cause.

( 1 ) SINCE common questions of law and fact arise in both the writ petitions, they are disposed of by a common judgment. For the purpose of disposal of the writ petitions, the facts in W. P. No. 14814/84 may be stated. Respondent No. 2 and others are the workmen appointed in the Andhra Scientific Company Ltd. , Machilipatnam, which was taken over under the Andhra Scientific Company Ltd. (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1982 (Act 71 of 1982 ). They laid application under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (Act 14 of 1947), for short, "the Act", for computation of difference of wages payable to them under the Wage Board recommendations for scientific industries. Their claim is that they are entitled to wages at Rs. 1. 00 per point for rise or fall of the Al India Consumer Index, every half yearly. The base is 1960. In 1960. The consumer piece index was 100 points. The calculation is to be effected accordingly and if so calculated they would be entitled to wages at Rs. 70. 00 per month from 1974 to 1977 and at Rs. 91. 00 from 1977 onwards.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has resisted this claim. It is their case that after the Wage Board recommendations, conciliation was effected by the Labour Department in the proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Act; there was a settlement entered into on 21/07/1975 to be effective from 1/04/1974; this was signed by the three parties Management, Labour Officer and Workers Union Under item No. 1 of the pay-scales for the skilled and unskilled workmen, the Variable Dearness Allowance was fixed at Rs. 82. 00. The base for item No. 2 variable Dearness Allowance is 1960. The All India Consumer Price index over and above 252 points as on the date of agreement would be paid at the rate of Re. 1/- per unit; it is revisable twice a year commencing the first period from January to June and the second period from July to December. They are to be effected in June and October respectively. The workmen were being paid at the rate of Rs. 82. 00 upto 1/04/1974 which was revised in 1977 at Rs. 1-30 ps. per point and they were paid at that rate from 1977. Therefore, the amounts are being legally paid. It is also further contended that by operation of the agreement entered into under Section 12 (3), the application under Section 33-C (2) does not lie. It is also further contended that under the recommendations of the Wage Board, the application under Section 33c (2) also does not lie.

( 3 ) THE Labour Court had considered the question from two perspectives. On the binding nature of the settlement under Section 12 (3) it has held that since the proposal for settlement had not been circuited among all workmen, and the petitioners are not parties to the settlement and they are not the members of the Union which represented the tripartite agreement, therefore it is not binding on them. It next considered on merits 1960 is the base period. The consumer index was taken at 100 points. , and calculated on that basis and upheld the claim of the workmen.

( 4 ) SRI Srinivasa Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner firstly contended that application under Section 33-C (2) does not lie in view of the settlement arrived at under Section 12 (3) of the Act. Section 12 (3) postulates that if a settlement of the dispute or any of the matters in dispute is arrived at in the course of the conciliation proceedings, the Conciliation Officer shall send a report thereof to the appropriate Government together with a memorandum of the settlement signed by the parties to the dispute. The settlement was now ultimately accepted by the Government and it became effective from 1/04/1974. Under Section 18 of the Act, the persons on whom the settlement is binding has been postulated. Sub-section (3) thereof states that a settlement arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings under the Act. . . . which has become enforceable shall be binding on (a ). . . . . . (b) all other parties summoned t