IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Tripartite Settlement dated 23.07.2008 was binding on the workmen, and the court did not find grounds to interfere with the decision of the Labour Court.

The legality and validity of an Award dated 26.06.2014 passed by the learned Labour Court, Guwahati in Ref. Case No. 14/2008 is the subject matter of challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Workers and Employees Union. By the aforesaid Award, the issue referred to the learned Labour Court has been decided in favour of the Management and against the workmen by holding that the workmen are not entitled to wages for the period of strike from 27.11.2007 to 29.11.2007 and for the period of lock-out from 29.11.2007 to 24.07.2008.

2. Before going to the issue which has arisen for determination, the facts of the case, as projected in the writ petition, may be narrated briefly.

3. The appropriate Government had made a reference to the learned Labour Court, Guwahati under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter the ID Act) on the following issue:

“Whether wages for the period of no work during strike / lock-out is admissible to the workmen.”

The issue was however modified on an application made by the petitioner vide a corrigendum dated 07.03.2009 and the modified issue reads as follows:

“Whether the workmen are entitled for wages during the period of strike from 27th November, 2007 to 29th November, 2007 and for the period of lock-out from 29th November, 2007 to 24th July, 2008.”

4. The contesting parties had filed their respective written statements and additional written statements.

5. From the pleadings, it appears that the unit namely, Assam Carbon Products Ltd. was established in the year 1963. However, with the emerging change, in the year 2007, there was a decision to engage contract labours which was opposed to by the Workers Union. The matter had to be intervened by the Assistant Labour Commissioner. As per the Management, the production target was required to be increased from time to time as per the capacity of the machines. On the other hand, the Union had demanded for filling up of the retirement vacancies which however, was not done. As per the Management, the workload of the workers was less than the norms set up by the National Productivity Council (NPC) and therefore, the Management had insisted the workers for increase of the workload and the same was also linked with the bonus to be paid to the workers. Accordingly, an agreement was entered into whereafter, the bonus were released to the workmen.

6. The engagement of contract labourers in certain sections by the Management was objected to by the Union and accordingly, on 23.11.2007, the Union held an executive meeting resolving to protest forthwith if such attitude of the Management continues for engagement of contract labourers other than in the kiln area.

7. As the demands of the Union were not considered, agitation was started on 27.11.2007. The Union has contended that the Management had lodged false allegations before the authorities of resorting to strike leading to a conciliation proceeding under the aegis of the Labour cum Conciliation Officer. As per the Union, the conciliation proceeding was ignored and the Management had declared lock-out of the establishment on 29.11.2007. As per the Union, there was no notice of such lock-out and therefore, the same was illegal and consequently, they demanded for full back wages for the period of lock-out.

8. On the other hand, the contention of the Management was that the Union was interfering in the bona fide decisions of the Management including recruitment of managerial staff and from July, 2007, the Union had adopted a “go slow” tactic and the duties were not performed properly which had adversely affected the production of the factory. In this regard, notices / communications were issued to the Union. It is contended that from 25.09.2007, there was complete breakdown of operations in the factory as the members of the Union resorted to violence and threatened the Management staff. The Management was compelled to report the same to the Noonmati Police Statio