MYPOWER MAZDOOR WELFARE UNION Vs. SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER SOCIAL WELFARE ANDLABOUR DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this petition raises a rather subtle issue concerning the delicate question relating to the exact function of the government with regard to the making of a reference under Section 10 of the industrial disputes ACT where the conciliation has failed. To amplify the exact nature of the controversy, what is contended is that the government is not the adjudicating authority in such situations and .therefore it is not entitled to evaluate the merits of the case which can only be done by the labour court. In sum and substance, what is contended is that where a settlement has failed at the conciliation level, that as long as a bona fide dispute exists, the matter must be referred to the competent court and that it is not within the province of the government to refuse a reference.

(2.) the facts are within a very narrow ambit. The petitioner-union represents certain employees who are designated as helpers and are employees of the Karnataka power corporation limited, hereinafter referred to as the k.p.c. briefly stated, they contend that they possess the requisite skills and qualifications for the higher post of operatives (general) and operative (works) and junior assistants despite which, they are wrongly retained in the helper cadre and are therefore deprived of their benefits. Their grievance was also that they were entitled to in service recruitment to the higher post but that this was denied to them. The contention of the management was that this position is factually incorrect and that the petitioners-employees were found unsuitable for the higher post. The case was referred to conciliation and the officer submitted a failure report.

(3.) the failure report submitted by the commissioner of labour, bangalore, came to be considered by the government of Karnataka and the under secretary to government, social welfare and labour department, by endorsement dated 17-6-1992 and recorded a finding that this was not a fit case in which a reference should be made. Detailed reasons have been set out for this decision and the petitioner-union once again represented to the authority concerned whereupon, the government by Order dated 25-6-1993 reiterated the position that no case existed for making such a reference. It is against these two orders that the present petition has been filed.