against an undertaking given by the Union that they would maintain peace and tranquility at the work place. In the complaint, the Respondent Union filed an application for interim relief, for directions to the Petitioner herein not to give effect to the lockout and allow the workmen, named in the notice, to resume normal duties and to pay wages to them. That prayer was rejected by the Industrial Court by its order dated 24 July 2014. The Respondent Union carried the matter before this Court in a writ petition, which came to be dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The Respondent Union, thereupon, carried the matter before the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition. When the SLP initially came up for hearing, the Supreme Court, by its order dated 10 April 2015, directed the first Petitioner employer to calculate and deposit in the Court the wages payable to the workmen, affected by the lockout, with effect from 1 August 2014 onwards. Such deposit was to be made within two months from the date of the order, i.e. on or before 10 April 2015. In pursuance of this order, a sum of Rs.1,40,32,249/- was deposited by the first Petitioner herein in the Supreme Court, towards wages payable to the affected workmen between 1 August 2014 and 30 April 2015. On 27 July 2015, the Supreme Court recorded a statement of learned Counsel for the first Petitioner employer that it was ready to lift the lockout qua 150 out of a total 202 workmen, to be named in a list. In pursuance of this statement, the lockout was lifted qua 150 workmen on 14 August 2015. As for the remaining 52 workmen, 12 had already resigned and left the employment of the first Petitioner. For the remaining 40 workmen, the lockout was lifted on 1 September 2015. Upon lifting of the lock-out, these workmen were separately charge-sheeted and suspended pending
