Amitava Roy, J.

1. These proceedings in succession between the same parties dredge up interrelated issues admitting of analogous adjudication and having been so heard, are hereby being disposed of by this common determination.

2. I have heard Mr. A. Dasgupta, advocate assisted by Mr. S. Chakraborty, advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned State counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Mr. P.K Goswami, senior advocate assisted by Mr. S.N. Sarma, advocate and Mr. S. Sarma, advocate for the Respondent No. 4 and Mr. N. Dutta, senior advocate assisted by Mr. L.P. Sharma, advocate for the Respondent No. 5.

3. The Petitioner-union claims to be the representative body of the employees of the Hindustan Unilever Ltd., Respondent No. 4 as its members and registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 ('the Act, 1926'). The Respondent-company is engaged in the activity of manufacturing of various types of consumer goods with its factory at Doom Doom. On 21.12.2003 the Petitioner-union submitted a charter of demand for revision of wages, dearness allowance and other conditions of service of the workmen and following necessary deliberations an amicable settlement was arrived