( 1 ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the judgment and order dated 11th March, 2004 delivered by the Industrial Court, Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No. 179 of 1997.

( 2 ) THE complaint had been filed by the respondents herein is not in dispute. Further, that complaint invokes the jurisdiction of the Industrial Court, Mumbai, alleging commission of Unfair Labour Practice covered by Item 6 of Schedule II,. Item 5, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU and PULP Act for short ).

( 3 ) IT would be necessary to notice the allegations and averments in the complaint for appreciating the rival contentions.

( 4 ) THE respondents-original complainants alleged that the complaint is instituted on the basis that they are employees of one Strom-Kraft Controls (petitioner No. 2 herein ). They also claim to be employees of the orig. respondent no. 2. (petitioner No. 1 before this Court ).

( 5 ) THE complaint proceeds on the basis that the original first respondent is a partnership firm which is engaged in the business of manufacturing Control gears and other Electrical Accessories used in cranes.

( 6 ) ONE Gopal Vazirani is impleaded as respondent No. 3 to the complaint along with his wife Smt. Padma Vazirani on the basis that they are partners of the petitioner No. 2 before me. They are husband and wife. The husband is also chairman of the petitioner No. 1 original respondent No. 2.

( 7 ) THE complaint proceeds to allege that the respondent No. 2. e. Petitioner no. 1 before me is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 of which one Gopal Vazirani (respondent No. 3 to the complaint) is the Chairman. It is alleged that he looks after the business activities of the firm as well. Original respondent No. 5 is the Works Manager of the WMI Cranes. e. Petitioner No. 1 before me.

( 8 ) FOR brevity's sake, the petitioners would be referred to as WMI Cranes and Strom-Kraft Controls. The undisputed position is that Strom-Kraft Controls is a partnership firm, whereas WMI Cranes is a company registered under the companies Act.

( 9 ) THE complaint proceeds to allege that the firm Strom-Kraft Controls was employing more than 100 employees but prior to two years of the filing of the complaint, the number has been brought down to 42. The factory is at Ghatkopar. WMI Cranes is employing more than 350 employees at its factory at Bhandup. It is also employing more than 100 employees in its office.

( 10 ) THE number of employees working in Strom-Kraft Controls is 42 workers at the factory, 15 staff members and 5 watchmen at the establishment/office.

( 11 ) THE complaint alleges that the employees in the firm were capable of being transferred to the company and a list of about 14 employees who have been working initially in the firm but later on transferred to the company is also annexed. Similarly, it is alleged that Gopal Vazirani was looking after the overall production and business activities of both the firm and the company. The employees were inter-transferable. The complaint alleges that staff members and the Works Manager (original respondent No. 5), initially working for the firm are now working for the limited company. Thus, there is absolute functional integrality, common management and general unity as far as the firm and the limited company is concerned.

( 12 ) EVEN the employees from the factory are transferable. However, it is alleged that by a letter dated 21st April, 1996, the firm informed the employees working in the factory that w. e. f. 21st May, 1996 the activities of the firm would be closed down and the reason assigned for the same was tough competition in the market. It is alleged that these reasons are false, mala fide and untenable in law.

( 13 ) IT is alleged that the complainants are members of a Trade Union having its office at Kandivali (West), Mumbai and the said union filed a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document