Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 1999 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1999 (8) TMI 952 - HC - Companies Law

Issues Involved:
1. Effective date of amalgamation of Indian Tube Company Ltd. with Tata Iron and Steel Company (TISCO).
2. Entitlement of workmen to pay scale, dearness allowance, and other benefits post-amalgamation.
3. Validity and binding nature of agreements made by majority union members with TISCO.
4. Existence of industrial disputes at the time of reference.
5. Resolution of industrial disputes prior to the reference date.

Analysis of Judgment:

1. Effective Date of Amalgamation:
The primary issue was determining the effective date of amalgamation between Indian Tube Company Ltd. (Tube Company) and Tata Iron and Steel Company (TISCO). The Tribunal initially held that April 1, 1983, was the effective date based on the scheme of amalgamation and related orders. However, the High Court clarified that while April 1, 1983, was the "appointed day" for accounting purposes, the "effective date" for the transfer of employees and benefits was October 1, 1985. This conclusion was drawn from the scheme's Clause 15 and the High Courts' orders, which indicated that the scheme would take effect upon filing certified copies of the orders with the Registrar of Companies, which occurred on October 1, 1985.

2. Entitlement to Pay Scale, Dearness Allowance, and Other Benefits:
The Tribunal had ruled that workmen of the Tube Company were entitled to receive pay scales, dearness allowance, and other benefits at par with TISCO employees from April 1, 1983. However, the High Court found this ruling to be erroneous, stating that the effective date for such entitlements was October 1, 1985. This decision was based on the fact that employees continued to draw wages from the Tube Company until September 30, 1985, and only started receiving benefits equivalent to TISCO employees from October 1, 1985.

3. Validity and Binding Nature of Agreements:
The Tribunal had considered whether the agreements made by the majority of Tube Company Workers' Union members, who joined the Tata Workers' Union, were binding on the minority members. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the union, stating that the agreements were binding. However, the High Court did not delve deeply into this issue, as the primary focus was on the effective date and entitlements.

4. Existence of Industrial Disputes:
The Tribunal had concluded that there were industrial disputes between the management of Indian Tube Company Ltd. and its workmen at the time of the reference. The High Court did not specifically address this issue in detail, as it was more focused on the effective date and the subsequent entitlements of the employees.

5. Resolution of Industrial Disputes Prior to the Reference Date:
The Tribunal had found that the industrial disputes had not been resolved prior to the reference date, thus justifying the reference for adjudication. The High Court did not specifically challenge this finding, as the primary contention was regarding the effective date of amalgamation and the related benefits.

Conclusion:
The High Court set aside the Tribunal's award, determining that the effective date of amalgamation for the purpose of employee benefits was October 1, 1985, not April 1, 1983. Consequently, the workmen of the Tube Company were entitled to pay scales, dearness allowance, and other benefits at par with TISCO employees from October 1, 1985. The writ application was allowed, and the Tribunal's order was quashed, with no order as to costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates