In the reply filed, while denying various allegations made by the claimant, the second respondent as a fact has stated that the second respondent was providing handling services to the Lufthansa German Airlines.
In the claim petition filed before the Industrial Tribunal, it is the specific case of the appellant that, the new companypany which has started ground handling services from January, 2009, is utilising the same equipment belonging to the second respondent.
As claimed before the Industrial Court, it is the case of the appellant that management i.e. the second respondent should reinstate left out workmen in service by extending the benefit of A. SLP C Nos.25341 42 of 2017 companytinuity of service and full wages.
There was numbercommunication of such reference to, Lufthansa German Airlines.
On the information furnished by the first respondent that they would stop ground handling services from the International Airlines at Delhi w.e.f.
It is the allegation of the appellant that the first respondent has number closed down or stopped the business in India.
The second respondent Globe Ground Private Limited is a companypany, and is a joint venture formed by Globe Ground Deutschland GmbH and the Bird Group with 51 and 49 shares respectively.
The aforesaid reference order was sent by the Government to the Presiding Officer of Tribunal and also to the second respondent herein.
Questioning the order dated 24.11.2016 in L.P.A No.107 of 2016 and further order dated 14.7.2017 passed in R.P.No.146 of 2017, the appellant is before us in these appeals.
Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the appellant employees union has filed intra companyrt appeal under clause X of the Letters Patent, in L.P.A No.
Necessary facts in brief for disposal of these appeals are that, the appellant workers union raised the industrial dispute which was referred by the Central Government to Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MADHU BALA Date 2019.04.23 175039 IST Reason Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court by an order dated A. SLP C Nos.25341 42 of 2017 04.02.2010.
There was an order allowing the application filed by the appellant earlier, which was set aside by the High Court in the Writ Petiton by remitting the matter back for fresh companysideration and subsequently the Industrial Tribunal has passed an order dated 12.12.2013, impleading the first respondent as a party, mainly on the ground that the first respondent was a holding companypany of the second respondent.
In December, 2008, the Bird A. SLP C Nos.25341 42 of 2017 Group had floated another companypany, Bird Worldwide Flight Services Ltd. which has undertaken ground handling and ancillary services to international airlines.
Before the Industrial Court, the second respondent herein has filed reply.
107 of 2016 which is dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned order dated 24.11.2016.
Before the Industrial Tribunal, the appellant workers union filed a statement on 10.3.2010, inter alia stating that the second respondent companypany is a subsidiary of the first respondent and was providing ground handling and ancillary services at the Indira Gandhi International Airport and airports located in different places like Calcutta, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad etc.
Further petition seeking review of the said order in R.P. No.146 of 2017, is also ended in dismissal by an order dated 14.7.2017.
Though, numberrelief is claimed against the first respondent i.e. the Lufthansa German Airlines, the appellants union has filed an application for impleadment of the first respondent in ongoing proceedings relating to industrial dispute.
Aggrieved by the order dated 12.12.2013, the first respondent i.e. Lufthansa German Airlines has filed Writ Petition Civil No.1255 of 2014 before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, which was A. SLP C Nos.25341 42 of 2017 allowed by the learned Single Judge by judgment dated 21.04.2014, by setting aside the order dated 12.12.2013 passed by the Industrial Tribunal.
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 24.11.2016 passed in L.P.A. No.107 of 2016 and order dated 14.7.2017 in R.P.No.146 of 2017 by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
Subhash Reddy,J. Leave granted.
It is also specifically alleged that the new companypany has retained most of the employees who worked earlier except the trade union activists.
15.12.2009, the members of the appellants union were issued termination numberices and the same is in violation of Sections 25 F, 25 G, 25 O and 25 N and other provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
