ALSTOM PROJECTS INDIA LTD. REP. BY ITS HR MANAGER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT, OF LABOUR, BANGALORE AND 2 OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The employer ALSTOM Projects India Limited is aggrieved by the impugned endorsement Annexure-B dated 17.1.2012 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner and Conciliation Officer, Gulbarga, holding that in view of the amendment of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by inserting Sec. 2A therein by the Act No.24 of 2010 (w.e.f., 15.9.2010), the respondent-workman - Gurudatta could raise a dispute before the Labour Court with respect to his dismissal with effect from 1.6.2010.

(2.) The learned counsel for the employee referring to Rule 10 of the Industrial Disputes (Karnataka) Rules, 1957, which is quoted below, urged that without a formal intimation to the employer and the parties concerned, the Conciliation Officer could not refer the dispute to the Labour Court and in the present case, the impugned order Annexure-B dated 17.1.2012 has been passed without giving any prior intimation to the petitioner-employer. He submits that, in view of this, the employer has been deprived of its opportunity to submit its case in regard to the dispute to the Conciliation Officer and therefore, the impugned endorsement dated 17.1.2012 Annexure-B deserves to be quashed by this Court.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the workman urged that in view of the amended Sec. 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches or otherwise terminates the services of an individual workman, any dispute or difference between that workman and his employer with regard to such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute requiring a reference to the Labour Court and thus, the conciliation proceedings in such cases are not mandatorily required to be held. Therefore, the alleged breach of principles of natural justice in the present case by the employer at the conciliation stage which is a stage prior to reference of dispute to the Labour Court is of no consequence and by Annexure-B dated 17.1.2012, the learned Deputy Labour Commissioner-has only directed the workman to approach the Labour Court, which cannot be challenged by the employer on the aforesaid ground, as the employer still has the full opportunity to defend its case before the Labour Court.