LexTULIP STAR HOTELS AND ORS. versus UNION OF CENTAUR-TULIP EMPLOYEES AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c TULIP STAR HOTELS AND ORS. v. UNION OF CENTAUR-TULIP EMPLOYEES AND ORS. MAY IO, 2007 [OR. ARIJIT PASA Y AT AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANT A, JJ.] Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Complaint-Maintainability of challenged-Dispute in relation to non- acceptance of cheques of Voluntary Retirement Scheme-Company alleging absence of employer and employee relationshi~Industrial Court and High Court without considering the issue of maintainability and the effect of the decisions of Supreme Court, held the complaint maintainable-Held: Since D relevant aspects have not been considered by Industrial Court and High Court, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter remitted to Single Judge of High Court for reconsideration of issues and applicability of decisions of Supreme Court. An agreement was entered into between the appellant-Company and the • E Hotel Corporation of India for purchase of Centaur Hotel. There was also an agreement to the effect that a Voluntary Retirement Scheme would be introduced within one year from the date of transfer. Later, consequent upon a writ petition, the appellant Company was directed to consider and independently float the YRS. The said Scheme was floated. The Schedule for F payment was also fixed but there was delay in implementation of the YRS. Though majority of workers accepted the cheques without demur, a request was made by some of the employees, who had framed a new trade union, for splitting in each case the cheque amount, i.e. the V.R.S. amount. When separate cheques were issued, the respondents refused to accept the cheques so far as they related to the V.R.S. The loan amount was adjusted and no objection was G raised. Subsequently, a complaint was filed under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971. The appellant-Company filed an objection contending that in view of decisions of the Supreme Court the complaint was not maintainable. The Industrial Court rejected the objection and held that the complaint was H 380 ~,- ...... - "'P-· TULIP STAR HOTELS v. UNION OF CENTAUR-TULIP EMPLOYEES 38 J maintainable. The Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High A Court declined to interfere. In the appeal filed by the Company it was contended that the Industrial Court and the High Court erred in not considering the specific plea of non- maintainability of the complaint and the effect of the decisions of the Supreme Court which had a direct had a bearing on the issue. B Disposing of the appeal and remitting the matter to the Single Judge of the High Court, the Court HELD: I. I. On the question of existence of relationship between the employer and the employee in the background of the trade Union Act decisions C have been rendered by Supreme Court in Vividh Kamgar Sabha and Sarva Shramik Sangh.* Though the plea appears to have been specifically urged before the Industrial Court and the High Court, no finding has been recorded on the basic issue. (Para 8 and 9) (383-G, H; 384-A) 1.2. Since the relevant aspects have not been considered by the D Industrial Court and the High Court, the orderes of the Industrial Court, the ;,. --, Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court are set aside. The i. Single Judge would reconsider the issues, as noted in the judgment. Consideration shall be of applicability of the three judgments in Vividh Kamgar, Cipla and Sarva Sharmik cases*. The effect of part acceptance shall E be considered as also the question as to when there has been adjustment of the sums payable in respect of the YRS. As the matter is pending since long it would be appropriate for the Single Judge to dispose of the matter as early as practicable. (Para 14) (387-A, B, q *Vividh Kamgar Sabha v. Kalyani Steels Ltd. and Ors., (2001) 2 sec F 381; Cipla Ltd. v. Maharashtra General, Kamgar Union and Ors., (2001) 3 - J sec 101 and Sarva Sharmik Sangh v. Indian Smelting & Refining Co. Ltd. and Ors., [2003) 10 SCC, relied on. Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, A.P. SIDC Ltd. and Anr. v. R Varaprasad and Ors., [2003) ll SCC 572; General Labour Union (Red Flag), G Bombay v. Ahmedabad Mfg. & Calico Printing Co. Ltd. and Ors., [1995) Supp 1 SCC 175 and Bank of India and Ors., v. K. V. Vivek Ayer and Anr., [2006) 9 sec 177, referred to. CIVIL APPELLATE ruRISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2431 of200
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.