(1.) BY this writ petition the petitioner, It had Motors (P) Ltd. , (herein to be called the company) has sought a declaration that the order of reference No. C-108/alc/ (4)/ 68-Lab, dated the 19th November, 1968, whereby the dispute about the entitlement of Bihari Lal, (herein to be called the workman) to pay provident fund, bonus and allowances as admissible to the checkers of the company was referred for adjudication to the Additional Industrial Tribunal (herein to be called The Tribunal) is ultra vires of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein to be called the Act) and that the award dated the 2nd April, 1971, made by the Tribunal as published in Delhi Gazette, Part VI, dated the 3rd June, 1971, be quashed.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the workman was employed by the company and in 1950 he was working as a checker. The company in partnership with M/s. Mool Chand Shripal Jain, owned a petrol pump at Azadpur, Delhi, which was subsequently shifted to G. T. Karnal Road, Delhi. Disputes arose inter se between the share-holders of the company about the management of its affairs. Some of the shareholders in October, 1960, filed a petition in the Punjab High Court under the Indian Companies Act. During the pendency of the petition, the parties compromised the disputes whereby the management of the company was divided into two groups commonly known as V group and K group of the company. The compromise was sanctioned by D. K. Mahajan, J. , by his order dated 12th May, 1961.
(3.) IN 1968 K group sold its share in the pump to V group per receipt, Annexure 7. The workman put forward a claim vide his letter March 1, 1968, alleging that he was transferred from the company to the petrol pump on an assurance given to him that he would continue to be governed by the terms and conditions of a checker of the company in spite of his transfer to the petrol pump. The workman made a claim against both the groups of the company, i. e. , K. group and V group, as well as against M/s. Mool Chand Shripal Jain. The claim of the workman was refuted by all the aforesaid three parties. The conciliation proceedings did not bear any fruit. As a result the matter was referred for adjudication to the Tribunal by notification dated the 19th November, 1968, Annexure 8.