VIII 373 of 1966 published in the Calcutta Gazette dated 27 9 1969.
In C.As.
V. Gupte, G. B. Pai, Bhuvanesh Kumari, B. Ram Rakhjani and J. B. Dadachanji Co. for the appellant.
1759 of 1971 Appeal by special leave from the Award dated August 11, 1969 of the Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, Calcutta in Case No.
Appeals by special leave from the Award dated March 23 1967 of the Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal in Misc.
675 681/67 .
M. Tarkunde, Rathin Das, Jitendra Sharma and S. K. Ganguli Co. for the appellant.
On 30 9 66 the Government of West Bengal referred to the Third Industrial Tribunal the following question for adjudication Is the human rationalisation as a measure of economic reorganisation of the Company reflected through job integration that have either been effected or proposed to be effected justified,?
161, 160, 162 64 and 167 of 1966.
From 6 9 66 the Company reorganised this marketing Organisation into two divisions the Main Lines Division and the Speciality Lines Division.
In C.A. 1759/71 .
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ALAGIRISWAMI, J. The first batch of appeals are by the Hindustan Lever Ltd. hereinafter called the Employer and Civil Appeal No.
675 to 681 of 1967.
On the evidence it held that the Union had the apprehension that the proposed reorganisation would 1 1967 68 33 F.J.R. 457.
AND Civil Appeal No.
Pending adjudication of this issue seven workers filed applications under section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act before the same.
M. Tarkunde, Jitendra Sharma and Janardan Sharma, for the Respondent.
Cases Nos.
The Calcutta Branch was companycerned only with marketing.
To what relief, if any, are the workmen entitled?
From the year 1956 at least, if number earlier, the companypanys marketing Organisation was in three divisions, the Soaps Division, the Foods Division and the Toilet Preparations Division.
1759 of 1971 is by the Mazdoor Sabha of the workers of the same employer in its Calcutta Branch.
1759 of 1971 by special leave granted by this Court.
By special leave granted by this Court the employer has filed the above 7 appeals.
Tribunal alleging that during the pendency of the adjudication their service companyditions had been changed adversely and their salary for the month of October 1966 had number been paid.
The main reference was finally disposed of on 11 8 69 by the same Tribunal holding in favour of the employer and the workers have, therefore, filed Civil Appeal No.
