| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3061 1970 SLD 3061 = 1970 PLD 3061 |
Lahore High Court
First Appeal from Order No. 34 of 1966, decided on 19th April 1968.
Presented By: Karam Elahi Chauhan and Muhammad Fazle Ghani Khan, JJ'
Mian Abdul Rashid for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Anwar for
Respondent.
First Appeal from Order No. 34 of 1966, decided on 19th April 1968.
Presented By: Karam Elahi Chauhan and Muhammad Fazle Ghani Khan, JJ'
Mian Abdul Rashid for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Anwar for
Respondent.
MESSRS THE ATTOCK OIL Co. LTD.-Appellant
VERSUS
THE SUPREME BODY OF OILFIELDS LEAGUE AND REFINERY UNION, RAWALPINDI -Respondent
Law: Industrial Disputes Ordinance, (LVI of 1959)
Section: 10(l)(a)
(a) Industrial Disputes Ordinance (LVI of 1959), S. 10(l)(a) Undertaking in a "settlement" between workers and employer no to raise any particular demand during operation of "settlement"- Basis of award on such settlement-Satisfaction of Court by examination of agreement that it was made in good faith and nor intended to defeat just and reasonable demands of workers. It is the duty of the Court to examine each agreement carefully to satisfy itself that it was made in good faith and was not intended to defeat just and reasonable demands put forth by the workers. When the Court is so satisfied it is only then that the settlement can be made the basis for the award of the Court. The terms of the settlement arrived at between the workers and the employer were as under :- (i) Accepting the terms of the agreement in full and final settlement of all demands and disputes in existence up to the time of agreement and/or pending before the Industrial Court ; (ii) undertaking not to raise or pursue during operation of this settlement any demand involving financial commitments/ expenditure. * * * * * The industrial dispute raised by the Workers' Union regard ing decrease in the bonus rate by the company subsequently was objected to as frivolous and vaxatious and on the ground that the Union was precluded from raising disputes involving financial expenditure: Held, the words in the agreement "undertaking not to raise or pursue during the operation of this Settlement any demand involving financial commitments expenditure direct or indirect on the heart of the Company" cannot be read independent of clause of the agreement which lays down that the terms of the agreement extend to all demands in dispute in existence up to the time of agreement and/or pending before the Industrial Court. It cannot, therefore, be argued that it was the intention of the parties to say the least of the Union that by this agreement. They closed the doors upon themselves of all those remedies which were open…