BINNY LIMITED Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main contention of Sri Kasturi, learned counsel for the appellant, is that the learned single judge ought to have taken into consideration the object and reasons impelling Parliament in amending Section 25N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which had earlier been held ultra vires by some of the courts. Merely because the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the Section subsequently in another proceeding it cannot invalidate the action which was proper at the time it was taken by the management. Reliance is sought to be placed upon certain observations of the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Nellai Cotton Mills Ltd., (1991-I-LLJ-35). THE learned judge in our opinion has rightly relied upon the ruling of the Constitution Bench in Workmen of Meenakshi Mills Ltd v. Meenak-shi Mills Ltd., (1992-II-LLJ-294), in which the constitutional validity of Section 25N of the Act has been upheld. We are not persuaded to take a view different from what the learned single judge has taken in the matter. As such, the appeal is rejected