H.M.T. LTD. versus H.M.T. HEAD OFFICE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. 69 · Decided: 29-10-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. VERMA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

H.M.T. LTD. 
v. 
H.M.T. HEAD OFFICE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION AND ORS. 
OCTOBER 29, 1996 
[J.S. VERMA AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.] 
Labour Law: 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Sections 22(1) (d), 23(a) & (c), 23, 
24 (3) and JO 
Strike Illegal but justified-Wages for such strike period-Entitlement-
National Industrial Tribunal found strike to be illegal, though justified, being 
in contravention of Ss. 22 (I) ( d) or 2 3 (a) or (c) of ID Act and awarded wages 
for such strike period-Held: Wages/or strike period, not payable-Even if 
strike was justified, no wages for strike period could have been awarded. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
Lock out--Legality of-Illegal strike officially called off but workmen, 
though reported/or duty, continued their agitational, disruptive and violent 
activities from within the factory premises-Lock out declared without 
complying with the provisions of S.22-Wages for such lock out period-
Entitlement-Held: In the circumstances of the case, although there was E 
non-compliance with S.22 the lock out is legal by virtue o/S.24(3)-Hence, 
wages for such lock out period, not payable. 
Section 2 (p )-Minimum wages-Settlement--Terms-Jnterpretation 
of-1978 settlement between management and unions of BEL, BEML, !TI, 
HAL and HMT-Term No. I provided unions' acceptance of pay and DA p 
offered by management without prejudice to unions' right to take up with 
Government of India the issue of revision of minimum wages and rate of 
neutralisation of DA beyond the specified point-Management, in case the 
Government accepted an improvement therein, agreed to revise the minimum 
wages and rate of neutralisation of DA in consultation with the unions-
Held: Such a term does not give to the workmen any vested right of G 
enhancement of wages or pay scales in case of revision in any other public 
undertaking. 
Minimum wages-Settlement-Interpretation of-1978 settlement 
between management and unions of BEL, BEML, IT!, HAL and HMT 
provided modification of relevant clauses of minimum wages if minimum H 
69 
70 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. 
· A wages in any other Engineering Central Public Sector Undertaking such 
as BHEL were increased-BHEL revised its minimum wages to Rs. 500 
p.111. w.e.f 1-9-1978-Therefore, the unions sought parity therewith and 
demanded addition of Rs. 30 to the existing pay sea/es-Consequently, a 
settlement dated 9-6-1981 was arrived at which (i) extended period of 
operation of 1978 settlement to 31-12-1982 (ii) workmen were entitled to 
B a lump sum of Rs. 700 and (iii) workmen were entitled to an adhoc allowance 
of Rs. 25 p.m. w.e.f 1-1-1981-Held: Demand of parity of minimum wages 
with BHEL stood concluded by the 1981 settlement-Demand of addition 
of Rs. 30 p.m. stood settled by the adhoc allowance of Rs. 25 p.m. provided 
for in 1981 settlement which is binding on the parties as it was reached in 
conciliation proceedings-Therefore, National Industrial Tribunal erred in 
C further enhancing the minimum wages to Rs. 500 p.m. on the ground that 
the 1981 settlement did not preclude the workmen from seeking revision of 
minimum wages consequent to the settlement in case of BHEL-But as 
leave under Art. 136 has not been granted to the management on this 
point, the increase granted by the Tribunal left unaltered-Further, the 
1981 settlement does not contemplate adjustment of the ad hoc allowance 
D of Rs. 25 p.m. towards the increase granted by the Tribunal. 
Settlement-Preamble-Expression "without prejudice to the 
contentions of either parry::..Ejfect of-Held : The said expression has to 
be read as a whole in the background of the demand raised by the unions-
E Thus the said expression can refer only to such matters not specifically 
covered by the terms of the 1981 settlement. 
Allowances-City Compensato~y Allowance-CCA was being paid 
only to employees of IT! since their DA was linked with All India Consumer 
Price Index which was lower than the Local Consumer Price Index with 
F which the DA of the employees of other public sector undertakings was 
linked-CCA was, therefore, paid to employees of IT! to remove this 
disparity-National Industrial Tribunal discontinued CCA to employees 
of IT! on the ground that the same was not being paid to employees of 
other public sector undertakings-Validity of-Held: In the circumstances 
G of the case, the direction of the Tribunal dispensing with the payment of 
CCA to IT! employees, uncalled for-Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 14 
.and 16. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.