JUDGMENT - R.J. KOCHAR, J.:---The respondent Union expects from the petitioner company and demands that the Canteen Costs/prices of the following items should not be increased from the prevailing rates as stated below :

1. Mendu Wada 0.06 ps.

2. Idli 0.12 ps.

3. Jalebi 3 pc. 0.18 ps.

4. Upma 0.18 ps.

5. Poha 0.12 ps.

6. Un-limited

Veg. Lunch 0.50 ps.

7. Non-veg items

such as :

Mutton Curry

with Rice,

Chicken Curry

with Rice,

Fish Curry

with Rice, each 0.50 ps.

8. Mutton Curry

with Rice 0.75 ps.

9. Spl. Thali 0.75 ps.

10. Banana 0.06 ps.

The price list produced by the petitioner Company demonstrates that no food item is sold at a price more than rupee one. The respondent Union has very strongly opposed the notice of the petitioner company to increase the prices of food items sold in the Canteen on the ground that these prices were fixed under the bi-lateral settlement from 1978 onwards and that the petitioner Company cannot increase the price of any eatable item sold in the Canteen without the consent of the Union as provided under the settlement. It is the case of the Union that the subsidy which the petitioner Company has been giving in the Canteen must continue as the essential service condition of the workman. It was very vehemently submitted by Shri Gonsalvis, for the Union, that this Court should not merely look at the low prices of the food items but should also consider the other "sacrifice" made by the Union in their other demands. Shri Gonsalvis has admitted that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and the Dearness Allowance linked with it has increased from 355 points in the year 1973 to 10501 points in June, 1999 i.e. more than 20 times. Inspite of this admitted steep rise in the figure of the CPI the Union has strongly opposed to any increase in the prices of the food items sold in Canteen though the amount of dearness allowance added in the pay packets of the workmen is increased with the CPI. It sounds very strange that on one hand the workman must get highest DA on the ground of rise in the CPI and while on the other hand they oppose the increase in the prices of the food items even by a single paisa. The Union has withheld its consent for any such rise in the prices of the food items.

2. The Price Chart produced by the petitioner Company gives details about the prices of the food items sold in Mumbai Canteen and Thane Plant Canteen of the petitioner company. The Chart also shows that the assessed prices by the Auditor and prices desired to be fixed by the petitioners in the place of the prevailing prices. By its notice dated 30-4-1999 the petitioner expressed its demand to increase the food prices in view of the tremendous rise in the prices and also huge losses suffer by the petitioner in the business. After explaining all the factors the petitioner demanded consent from the Union for increase in the food prices in both the Canteens. It also pointed out that under the Factories Act as well as the settlement dated 13-8-1957 the Canteen was required to be run on the basis of no profits no loss. The petitioners took pains to point out to the Union that in view of the current prices in the canteen they are suffering huge loses. By its reply dated 4-5-1999 the respondent Union refused to give consent to any increase in the food prices on the ground that the Canteen Subsidise was the part of the service condition of the workmen. In the course of mutual correspondence it appears that the petitioners tried to participate and convince the Union how on the basis of cost worked out by the cost accountant rise in the food prices have become inevitable. It further appears that there were several round of discussion between parties but all in vain. Finally, failure to arrive at an agreement or understanding led the petitioners to effect its notice dated 30-4-1999 w.e.f. 31-5-1999 after expiry of 30 days. The Union promptly objected to such an act and filed a complaint of unfair labour pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document