1978 PLP 422 (PLC)

Date of hearing: 28th June 1977. This is an application under section 50 of the I. R. O. for the interpre tation of Settlement No. 2.

2. The Union raised an industrial dispute agitating various demands. One of the demands related to the increase in salary. This is demand No. 19, which reads as under: "Salaries of all workmen shall be increased by 85 Y. . e. f. 1‑1‑1976."

3. There was settlement between the parties on 12th March 1976 and various terms were agreed upon. The settlement with regard to the increase in salary contained in para 2 of the settlement, which reads as under: "Revision of Pay Scales. The company will review the existing Pay s :ales of the Staff and such revision exclusively made by the Company shall be binding upon the Union."

4. Thereafter the company revised the pay scales without mentioning the date from which the pay scales would come into force. So there arose a dispute between the parties. According to the Management, the date effective was from 1‑1‑1977 whereas the Union claimed that it was to take effect from 1‑1‑1976. In order to resolve this dispute the present reference had been made by the Management.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the patties and I am of the view that the; effective date for the enforcement of the revised pay scales is from 1‑1‑19;6 as contended by the Union. The term of settlement did not make mention of the date from which the revised pay scales was to come into effect, but what was left to the discretion of the Management was the revision of the pay scales. In this connection it is not only important to bear in mind the original demand made by the Union but also clause (e) of para 21 of the settlement which reads as under‑ "This Settlement shall come into force w. e. f. 1st January. 1976 and will remain in force and binding upto 31st December, 1977 on both parties including all workmen of the Company and shall continue to binding after expiry of two months from the date on which either party informs the other patty on writing of its intention no longer to be bound by the Settlement." Reading the aforesaid para. it is plain enough that it was clearly under stood and agreed upon that any revision which was to take place would be w. e. f. lst January, 1976, otherwise there is no reason why in Settlement No. 2 the date from which the revision was to take effect was not stated. Since the statement itself was to take' effect from 1st January, 1976, there is no reason to presume that the question of enforcement of settlement No. 21 was either deferred or left to the discretion of the Management. In case this would have been the position, then it would have been is mentioned. In the absence of any such clear indication in clause No. in view of what has been stated by me, there is no manner of doubt that the revision of pay scales would be effective from fat January, 1976.

6. The reference is answered accordingly.