JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:---Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner. None present for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, though served. Perused the records.

2. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 15-3-1999, passed by the Industrial Court dismissing the complaint filed under section 28 r/w Items 5 and 9 of the Schedule-IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter called as "the said Act". The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been denied the benefits payable in terms of the Settlement dated 28-8-1991 even though such payments are being made to other workmen. The defence of the respondents is that the petitioner has no furnished the necessary declaration in terms of the Clause 24 of the Settlement and considering the provisions of the Clause 25 of the Settlement, the respondents are not liable to pay the dues to the petitioner and that therefore there is no case of any unfair labour practice being adopted by the respondents. The Industrial Court after considering the terms of the Settlement dated 28-8-1991 under which the dues were claimed by the petitioner, and consid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document