JUDGMENT - R.J. KOCHAR, J.:---The petitioner company is aggrieved by an order passed by the Industrial Court on 11th April, 1997 on an application filed by it in the pending complaint ULP No. 584 of 1997 filed by the respondent union under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the M.R.T.U. P.U.L.P. Act, 1971, which was not a recognised Union.

2. It appears that in March 1987, the petitioner company had suspended its manufacturing activities and except 18 workmen all other workmen of the factory had taken voluntary retirement by 1990. On 2nd February 1991, the petitioner company terminated the service of the said 18 workmen and declared total closure of the factory and tendered their legal dues. Except one workman all other workmen collected their dues. On 18th April 1991, after the closure of the said factory at Parel, the first respondent union filed a complaint of unfair labour practice (No. 584 of 1991) under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the Act alleging that the petitioner company had committed unfair labour practice viz., it had refused to employ the workmen and to pay wages to them from 2nd February, 1991 and that there was violation of Chapter V(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The petit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document