ORAL ORDER

1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner- General Secretary, Indian General Labour Federation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers :-

“a. To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to implement the settlement dated 05.03.2020 or to prosecute the respondent no. 2 to 4 for failure to implement settlements dated

05.03.2020.

b. To impose exemplary and heavy cost to respondent no.2 to 4 to set an example for others.

c. To grant such other and further reliefs, as may be deemed to be just and proper.”

2. The briefs facts of the present case are as under :-

2.1 The petitioner was working as watchman with M/s ONGC Ltd. i.e. respondent no.2 and 3 and M/s Lion Manpower Solutions Pvt. Ltd. is a contractor through which the petitioner has been getting salary every month. It is a permanent arrangement devised by the respondent no.2 and 3 to get its work done and as per this arrangement, when the contract of security is changed, the list of watchmen is handed over by the old contractor to new contractor and service of the watchmen is not disturbed up to the age of superannuation of the watchmen.

2.2 The petitioner has been working as watchmen with M/s Lion Manpower Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and when the contract of this company is terminated in 2019, the list of watchmen working under M/s Lion Manpower Solutions Pvt. Ltd. has handed over to the new contractor i.e. respondent no.3. Accordingly, the arrangement is changed and the service of the petitioner is continued with the respondent no.2 and 3, now through the respondent no. 4. The respondent no.4 has, on 01.06.2019, terminated the service of the petitioner by an oral order without following due process of law. The petitioner has approached the union-Indian General Labour federation has, on 04-09-2019, given a strike notice against the respondent no.2 to 4 and also against M/s Lion Manpower Solutions Pvt. Ltd., which has culminated into conciliation proceedings before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and Conciliation OfÏcer owing to no response from the respondent employers.

2.3 During the conciliation proceedings, the respondent no.4 has stated on 05-03-2020 that they will re-employ the petitioner within one month from 05-03-2020 and will report to the conciliation ofÏcer and requested not to proceed further, accordingly the conciliation is adjourned to next date i.e. 20.04.2020. The respondent no.4 has, instead of re-employment of the petitioner workmen, started lingering the matter by way or another. The respondent no.4 has during next three- four months re-deployed other workmen as watchmen. The union has, therefore on 15.06.2020 and 19.08.2020 applications to the respondent no.1 to initiate appropriate proceedings under Industrial Disputes Act owing to failure of respondent no.3 to re-

deploy the petitioner.

2.4 It appears that the respondent no.4 has developed complacency that nothing is going to happen if he will not comply the settlement made before the conciliation ofÏcer. The respondent authority has also issued notices to the respondent no.2 to 4 to appear before him, but, this has also not yielded any result. The union has, once again on 19.10.2020, given an application to the respondent no.1 to initiate action against the respondent no.2 to 4 for violation of provision of section 29 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The respondent authority has also issued notice on 28.12.2020 to the respondent no.2 to 4 to comply the settlement within 7 days and in case of failure to comply, the respondent authority will initiate necessary legal action against the respondent no. 2 to 4. The respondent no.4 has, on 11-02- 2022, played a trickery by giving promise before the learned Conciliation OfÏcer to implement the commitment given on 05-03-2020 in conciliation proceedings and accordingly, the complaint for violation of section 29 of Industrial D