DHAGAMWAR NARSINGH Vs. S S GREWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On September 25, 1947, the appellant was appointed by respondent No. 2, the Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., (hereafter called the Company) as the Chief Labour Officer of its collieries of which it appears to have a few, and he worked under the Company till the latter terminated his services by a notice dated December 5, 1955. On such discharge, the appellant, claiming to be a Welfare Officer of a mine within R. 74 (2) of the Mines Rules, 1955, which rule we shall later set out, filed an appeal before respondent No. 1, the Chief Inspector of Mines in India, under that rule questioning the validity of his discharge by the Company. The Chief Inspector held that the appellant was not a Welfare Officer within that rule and refused to entertain his appeal.

(2.) The appellant then moved the High Court at Patna under Art. 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ directing the Chief Inspector to decide the appeal. The High Court dismissed the appellant's petition agreeing substantially with the view taken by the Chief Inspector. The appellant has now appealed to this Court against the judgment of the High Court.

(3.) The Mines Rules, 1955 were framed under the Mines Act, 1952, and came into force on July 2, 1955. We are principally concerned with the proviso to R. 74 (2) but this has to be read with R. 72. The relevant portions of these rules are set out below:-