1. The petitioner in this writ petition is the Britannia Biscuit Company Ltd. Employees Union (for short the petitioner-union). It has prayed for the issue of a writ declaration that the settlement, dated 14th October, 1981, entered into between the Britannia Industries Employees' Union, the third respondent, (for short the recognized union) and the Britannia Industries Ltd., the second respondent (for short management) is null and void. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition may be set out as follows :

2. The management is engaged in the manufacture of biscuits and breads. It has been declared to be a public utility service within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act). It employs about 950 workmen. It is an admitted fact that the third respondent was recognized as the proper bargaining agent of the workmen by the management as per the recommendations of the State evaluation and implementation committee. It is also an admitted fact that some of the workmen of the management are members of the petitioner-union. The total strength of the workmen of the management consisted of permanent, temporary and about 439 casual employees. While so, in or about the beginning of 1979 both the recognized union and the petitioner-union made a demand on the management that the casual workmen should be made permanent. The management resisted the demand on the ground that in view of the fact that the Government of India had fixed the production capacity of the Madras unit of the management for the manufacture of biscuit as 3,600 tonnes per annum and it called upon the management to reduce the production gradually within the period of three years it would not be possible to regularize the casual workers. Ultimately, the matter was taken up for conciliation by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Madras. The conciliation proceedings resulted in two separate settlements being entered into between the management and the petitioner-union and the recognized union on 6th April, 1979. By the said settlement the management agreed to make 439 casual workers as temporary with effect from the date of their joining duty. It is not necessary for purpose of this writ petition to refer to the other terms of the agreement. There is no dispute that this settlement was not implemented by the management. On 28th January, 1980, the recognized union made a demand on the management claiming that the temporary workers should be confirmed. The management, however, took the stand that they wanted to reduce the total number of workmen from 978 to 761 on the ground that the management needed only 575 workmen on a permanent basis and the rest on a temporary or casual basis. To this effect the management addressed a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Labour as early as on 30th August, 1980. Further, on 8th September, 1980, they wrote to the Deputy Commissioner of Labour that the management would be prepared to consider the confirmation of the temporary employees, but that before the branch capacity was finalized neither the confirmation of the temporary workers nor an increase in wages could be considered. On 6th January, 1981, the management wrote to the recognized union that it would not be possible to consider any permanency for any temporary worker since the branch capacity was in question in addition to the problem of excess labour on hand. On 20th February, 1981, the petitioner-union called upon the management to confirm forthwith 396 temporary workmen. On 14th April, 1981, the recognized union addressed a letter to the Prime Minister of India stating that the management had informed them that 394 workmen would not be confirmed and that their services would be terminated with effect from July, 1981 onwards due to the capacity restraint placed by the Government of India on the management at Madras. The communication requested the Prime Minister of India to intervene and advise the management to regularize the said 394 t