A lockout declared as a necessary response to an illegal and unjustified strike involving violence is legally justified. Consequently, workers are not entitled to back wages for the lockout period, particularly when the claim for such wages is raised after an unreasonable delay.

JUDGMENT:

RAJESH MAZUMDAR, J.

Heard Mr. P.K. Tiwari, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. A. Dasgupta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Management of Assam Carbon Products Limited being aggrieved by the Award dated 03.05.2018, passed by the learned Labour Court in Reference Case No. 4 of 2017, whereby the learned Labour Court had taken a view that although the strike resorted to by the Assam Carbon Workers and Employees Union was illegal and in violation of the provisions of Section 24(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, it was simultaneously held that the lockout declared by the management from 7.12.2010 to 8.3.2012, was also illegal. The learned Court had awarded 50% wages to be paid to the workers for the lockout period.

3. Assam Carbon Products Limited is a company engaged in the manufacture of carbon blocks, carbon brushes, and mechanical carbon. It has its factory and registered office at Birkuchi, Narangi, Guwahati, in the district of Kamrup Metro, Assam. The company is registered under the Companies Act, having its corporate office in Kolkata.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that during the year 2006, and in the early part of 2007, the production in the factory at Birkuchi had come down to an all- time low. On the suggestion of the Workers’ Union, a study was conducted to assess the capabilities of the machines and the productivity at the factory. A report was submitted by the National Productivity Council, which had conducted the study, and as per the report, the machines of the factory were stated to be under-utilized, and the production ought to have been double what was being produced at that date.

5. It is the allegation in the writ petition that the workers had resorted to concerted go-slow methods, indiscipline, lawlessness and absenteeism at the instigation of the Union during that period. At the intervention of the Labour cum Conciliation Officer, who was approached by the Management of the company, a settlement between the Management and the Union was arrived at on 15.10.2007. By the aforesaid settlement, disputes pending till that date were taken to be resolved.

6. Despite the intervention of the Assistant Labour Commissioner on the agitational programs resorted to by the workers of the unit and despite the settlement having been arrived at, the workmen resorted to a lightning strike on and from 27.11.2007, which continued till 29.11.2007. The Management had to declare a lockout in the factory thereafter, with effect from 29.11.2007. After a series of conciliation parleys, a memorandum of settlement was arrived at between the Management and the Assam Carbon Staff and Workers Union before the Labour Commissioner cum Conciliation Officer, Assam, on 23.07.2008, wherein it was agreed that the wages for the period of the strike and the lockout would be governed by the principle of “No Work No Pay”. In view of the settlement, the lockout was lifted on 24.07.2008. It is the case of the petitioner that although the respondent-Union had initially participated in the conciliatory proceedings, they refused to be a party to the settlement