Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – s.18 and Explanation to s.25C – Appellants-employees joined the services of respondent-State Road Transport Corporation as “Badali Kamdars” – Settlement between Union of the workers and Corporation to resolve several issues in relation to service conditions of the employees – cl.20 of the Settlement, dealt with the placement and absorption of the “Badali Kamdars” in the permanent cadre of conductor and grant of time scale to such workers –Hundreds of “Badali Kamdars” who were found eligible and fulfilled the conditions in terms of cl.20 of the settlement were absorbed in the services as permanent employees on the post of conductor and were accordingly given the time scale on the expiry of completion of 180 days in the cadre – Dispute between these employees and the Corporation as to from which date the benefit to make them permanent and the benefit of time scale should be granted to such “Badali Kamdars” – Industrial Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the employees – High Court set aside the award of Industrial Tribunal –Held: Settlement once arrived at between the employer and the employees as provided in s.18 is binding on the employer and the employees – It is not in dispute that the Corporation and the Union of workers entered into the settlement – Corporation followed the procedure provided in cl.20 while granting the employees their permanent cadre and the time scale of conductor– There is no basis for the appellants to claim the aforesaid benefit on their completing 180 days of the service from the date of their initial appointment as “Badali Kamdars” as against on the expiry of 180 days from the date when they were absorbed in the permanent cadre – Appellants neither challenged the settlement nor its applicability – Settlement is binding on both parties in terms of s.18.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Settlement once arrived at between the employer and the employees as provided in Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is binding on the employer and the employees. It is not in dispute that, the Corporation and the Union of the workers of the Corporation had entered into the settlement in respect of various issues in relation to their service conditions. One such issue was in relation to the absorption of Badali Kamdars in the permanent cadre of the Corporation. Clause 20 provides the manner in which it was to be given effect to by the parties. [Paras 25, 26] [572-F-H]
1.2 It is not in dispute that the Corporation followed the procedure provided in clause 20 while granting the employees their permanent cadre and the time scale of conductor. In other words, all eligible “Badali Kamdars” were absorbed in the set up and accordingly granted benefit in terms of the procedure prescribed in clause 20 of the Settlement. [Para 28] [574-A]
1.3 There is no basis for the appellants (employees) to claim the benefit from the date of their initial appointment as “Badali Kamdar”. Indeed, there is neither any factual foundation nor any legal foundation to claim such benefit. The appellants neither challenged the settlement nor its applicability. In other words, the legality or/and binding nature of settlement was never questioned in these proceedings. In this view of the matter, the settlement is binding on both parties in terms of Section 18 of the Act. The concept of “Badli Kamdar” is statutorily recognized under the Act. Explanation to Section 25C defines the term “Badli Kamdar”. [Paras 30, 33 and 34] [574-D-G; 575-A]
1.4 The appellants referred extensively to the evidence led by the parties to support their submission. The evidence cannot be appreciated in the appeals filed under Article 136 of the Constitution. It is more so when the Single Judge and Division Bench did not agree with the factual findings of the Tribunal and rightly reversed those findings. It is binding on this Court. [Paras 38 and 39] [575-E-F]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.