DES RAJ Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Each of these appeals is by special leave and is directed against the Award made in different disputes by the Labour Court. The common justification for ignoring the High Court and approaching this Court directly by way of special leave, according to Mr. Jitendra Sharma for each of the appellants, is that there are a couple of Full Bench decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court holding that the Irrigation Department of the State Government of Punjab is not an 'industry' and no useful purpose would have been served by routing the matters through the High Court as the Full Bench decision would have been followed.

(2.) The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 5415 of 1985 was a foreman in the Mechanical Construction Division under the Irrigation Department and had applied under Section 33C-2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Labour Court for recovery of arrears of annual increments.

(3.) The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 2168 of 1987 was a T. Mate in the P.W.D. Drainage Division. When his services were terminated without complying with the requirements of the law, he challenged the termination before the Labour Court. The appellant in the remaining appeal was an Operator in the Mechanical Division, Rohtak under the Irrigation Department of Haryana State. His services were terminated and thereupon he approached the Labour Court disputing the validity of the said order. In each of these cases challenge was advanced by the governmental authority to the maintainability of the application before the Labour Court on the ground that the employer was not an 'industry' and the Act did not apply. The Labour Court by different orders made in each of these cases upheld the objection and declined relief to the employees. The common question in these appeals, therefore, is as to whether the Irrigation Department of either Government is an 'industry'.