SECRETARY Vs. RAJUBHAI R JADEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner - Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Government of India - has filed this petition challenging the order made by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in O.A. No.533 of 1998 on 25.8.1998.

(2.) The respondent No.1 herein, who was the applicant before the Tribunal, submitted that he was a casual labourer from 5.12.1983 and continued upto 11.3.1984. His services were terminated. Raising a contention that he had completed 240 days of service and his services were terminated in contravention of the Labour Laws, he raised disputes under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Rajkot for conciliation. Section 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act points out the procedure and powers of conciliation officers, Boards, Courts and Tribunals. Sections 12 refers to duties of conciliation officers. It is the duty of the conciliation officer to bring about a settlement of the dispute, to investigate the matter and has to strive for an amicable settlement of the dispute. In case no such settlement is arrived at, the conciliation officer has to send to the appropriate Government a full report setting forth the steps taken by him for ascertaining the facts and circumstances relating to the dispute for bringing about a settlement thereof. He has to state the facts and circumstances and the reasons on account of which, in his opinion, a settlement could not be arrived at. It is after this report, the Government, if satisfied, has to make a reference. A duty is cast where the Government does not make a reference to record the reasons thereof and to communicate the same to the parties concerned. It is required to be noted that in case of failure report, which is under the Industrial Disputes Act, the further proceedings may be initiated by the party aggrieved. Thus, the communication of failure report, though relating to service, cannot be said to be a matter which would attract the provisions contained in Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

(3.) The respondent No.1 before the Tribunal, viz. the petitioner herein, vide letter dated 19.5.1998 informed the parties that the Central Government do not consider the case to be a fit case for reference for adjudication and indicated the reasons as under: