DECISION This is an application made under section 50 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance for the interpretation of the settlement. The Union had raised industrial dispute by serving demand notice followed by strike- notice. Conciliation proceedings were resumed and a settlement was reached.
According to settlement the salary of all workers drawing upto Rs. 800 per month was increased by Rs. 22 per month in addition to the increase in the other allowances. Subsequently the Employees Cost of Living (Relief) (Amendment) Act, 1974 was passed allowing cost of living equal to Rs. 50 per month or 10% of the wages whichever was more with effect from the 8th of June, 1974 with a proviso that any relief intended to have been granted by way of cost 'of living shall be adjustable. In view of this, a dispute arose between tte parties as the workers claimed the relief in addition to the relief granted under the settlement whereby the Management declined on the ground that the relief is due to a rise in the cost of living and, therefore, adjustable. Consequently the present application was made by the Management.
2. On the perusual of the settlement and hearing of the arguments I am of the view that this is not a question of interpretation of settlement but it is a question of intention to be gathered as to whether the increase allowed under the settlement was intended towards 1he cost of living and was adjustable. There is nothing in the settlement to indicate the intention and it is not possible to ascertain intention without taking additional evidence which is not the function of this Court but any party claiming the right can approach the Labour Court under section 34 of the I. R. O. and it is for the Labour Court to take evidence and ascertain the intention of the parties.
3. In the result the application is dismissed.