* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+W.P.(C) No. 10683/2009 and C.M. No. 9590/2009 (for stay)
% Date of Decision: 04th August, 2009
# BRITISH AIRWAYS INDIAN AIR HOSTESS' UNION
..... PETITIONER
! Through: Mr. Bharat Sangal, Advocate
VERSUS
$ REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANOTHER
.....RESPONDENTS
^ Through: Ms. Kimmi Brara Marwaha, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 CORAM:
Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL
1. Whether reporters of Local paper may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?NO S.N.AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) The petitioner is a registered trade union of the Cabin Crew including Air Hostess' employed by the British Airways (Respondent No. 2 herein). The terms and conditions of service of the members of the petitioner union is governed in terms of bipartite settlement dated 18.10.2007. The management of British Airways vide its communication / notice dated 15.07.2009 under Section 9 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, sent to the Regional Labour Commissioner and also to the petitioner union proposed to change some of the terms and conditions of service of the members of the petitioner union. The petitioner union is stated to have filed its reply dated 20.07.2009 to the said notice of the management and the reply has been filed by the union before the Regional Labour Commissioner. By way of its reply, the petitioner union W.P.(C) No.10683/2009 Page 1 of 3 wants the Regional Labour Commissioner to admit the matter in conciliation. The notice of the reply of the petitioner union was given to the management by the Regional Labour Commissioner for 03.08.2009 and now the proceedings pursuant to notice of the management dated 15.07.2009 are stated to be listed for consideration before the Regional Labour Commissioner on 13.08.2009.
2. In the present writ petition the petitioner has made the following prayers:
(a) Issue a Writ of mandamus or a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1, the Regional Labour Commissioner, New Delhi to declare the conciliation proceedings in regard to the proposed change in terms and conditions of service to have commenced before 05.08.2009, and
(b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No. 2 the British Airways not to give effect to the change in terms and conditions of service proposed in its Section 9 A notice dated 15.07.2009 (Annexure P-4 supra), and
(c) Pass such other or further orders as may be deemed necessary by the Court.
3. Mr. Bharat Sangal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contends that the management cannot change the terms and conditions of service of its members unless notice under Section 9 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is given by the management to the Regional Labour Commissioner and also to the union. He further submits that the effect to the notice cannot be given by the management before expiry of 21 days from the date of notice. The contention of Mr. Sangal is that since the petitioner union has responded to the notice of the management under Section 9 A within the time span of 21 days provided W.P.(C) No.10683/2009 Page 2 of 3 for giving effect to the contents of the notice and, therefore, according to him, the Regional Labour Commissioner was obliged to admit the matter in conciliation for exploring the possibilities of an amicable settlement in regard to proposed change in the terms and conditions of service of the members of the petitioner union. The petitioner apprehends that since proceedings before the Regional Labour Commissioner are now listed for 13.08.2009, the management may give effect to the proposed change as contained in its notice dated 15.07.2009 without hearing the petitioner union in conciliation proceedings.
4. The proceedings pursuant to Section 9 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, have already commenced before the Regional Labour Commissioner and will culminate by passing of an appropriate order by the Competent Authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This petition appears to be premature. In case, petitioner union has any grievance against any order yet to be passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner / Conciliation Officer, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take such remedial measures to vindicate its grievance as may be available to him in law.
5. In view of the above, this writ petition along with stay application is dismissed as premature.
Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
AUGUST 04, 2009 S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'bsr'
W.P.(C) No.10683/2009 Page 3 of 3