The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, a Central public-sector unit, that termed a strike on August 3 by three trade unions as “illegal” even as it prodded the company to exercise its managerial power. The company had contended that the one-day strike was “illegal and violative of Section 22 and 23 of Industrial Disputes Act”.

Petroleum Employees Union (first respondent) and Petroleum Workers Union (second respondent) from Chennai along with Petroleum Employees Association (third respondent) from Kochi had called for an immediate settlement of long-term wages and asked the company to do away with the concept of ‘notional maxima'.

In his order of July 28, Mr Justice K. Chandru, while dismissing the petition, said the ‘declaratory relief' (a judgement declaring rights and obligations of parties in anticipation of a dispute among them) was given based on the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the company had not claimed any other rights. “They (the company) must be directed to approach forums created under the Act, and must be told that remedy by way of writ jurisdiction under Art 226 of Constitution was not available to them.”

The Judge also said the company could not file a petition against the first two respondents as it had already moved the Madras High Court against them with a civil suit. The third respondent, on the other hand, was not within the territorial jurisdiction of the court according to Article 226(2) of the Constitution, the Judge added.

The respondents had signed a settlement agreement, valid up to May 31, 2008, with the company on August 8, 2001, in New Delhi under Section 12(3) read with Section 18(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Judge said it would be binding till a new settlement was arrived at among them.

In the last meeting on May 21, 2010, the first two respondents along with other unions had walked out of it. Subsequent meetings were also not attended by the unions. They had issued notice for a day's strike on August 3, 2011, even though negotiations were pending.

The petitioner said if the strike was allowed, it would affect industries, public and whole economy.

The Judge observed that the public-sector unit had been resorting to similar petitions since 2000, when the Bombay High Court gave an order. The Division Benches of the Madras High Court and the Kerala High Court had given orders in 2003 and 2006. The attempt of the company to come before the Madras High Court was an exercise in futility.

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW