CIMMCO BIRLA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has challenged the legality of the Terms of Reference dated 3/1/2001 and the Order dated 5/1/2001 passed under sub-section 3 of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Briefly stated it is the Petitioner's contention firstly that the entire dispute between the parties ought to have been referred for industrial adjudication and secondly that the Government was not competent to pass an Order prohibiting the 'lock-out' unless the question of the existence and/or legality of the Lock-out had also been referred for adjudication. The principle that jural scrutiny under Article 226 of the Constitution is permissible is now firmly entrenched in industrial jurisprudence. A Full Bench of this Court had expressed this opinion in M/s. India Tourism Development Corporation New Delhi vs. Delhi Administration. Delhi and Others, 1982 LAB I.C. 1309 when it quashed a Reference which did not encompass the real, dispute between the parties, viz. whether there was a lock-out or closure in the establishment. The Government had assumed that there was a lock-out, while the stance of the Management was that it was a closure. The Terms of Reference were - "whether the workmen as shown in Annexure 'A' are entitled to wages for the period of lock-out w.e.f. 1/1/1981 and if so, what directions are necessary in this respect?" It observed that, the Government could not reach a final decision on this question of fact, because this would normally lie within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal.

(2.) It was also opined by the Full Bench as follows:-

(3.) This decision was relied on by a Division Bench of this Court in Shri Moolchand Kharati Ram Hospital Karamchari Union Vs. Labour Commissioner and others, 1907 I AD (DELHI) 134, while upholding the quashing of the Order of Reference for the reason that the Management's case that the workers had participated in an illegal strike was not forwarded for adjudication. The decision of the Division Bench was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Moolchand Kharati Ram Hospital K. Union vs. Labour Commissioner & Co.. JT 2000 (Suppl.2) SC 204. The opinion of the Division Bench is clear from a reading of the following Passage:-