R BALASUBRAMANIAN Vs. CARBORUNDUM UNIVERSAL LIMITED OKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three petitioners workmen challenge in this petition the order of the Industrial Tribunal dated April 30 1978 holding that their complaint under sec. 33A was not tenable because they were not proved to be protected workmen at the time when the order of dismissal was passed on the morning of November 28 1972 and therefore there was no contravention of sec. 33(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Act.

(2.) The three petitioners were the office-bearers viz. President Vice-president and Treasurer respectively of the concerned union which was the sole union at the time in this company. This trade union viz. Carborundum Universal Union Okha came in existence since November 1970 For the previous year these three petitioners were recognised as protected workmen as per the decision of the Conciliation Officer dated December 23 1971 For the year in question before the requisite time of 30th September 1972 i. e. on September 25 1972 the union communicated to the company the names of five officers of the trade union who were employed in this companys establishment and who should be recognised as protected workmen under sec. 33(3) read with Rule 66. This application was received by the company on September 29 1972 and within the prescribed period of 15 days from the receipt of that letter the company failed to give any reply or to recognise the list of the five workmen submitted by the concerned trade union. In fact this was the same list except for a change of one of the office-bearers as in the previous years list which was duly recognised. Thereafter the union approached the Conciliation Officer by the letter dated October 28 1972 as the company had failed to declare the names of the protected workmen. Even the Conciliator passed an order on November 28 1972 that the five persons mentioned in the unions application dated December 25 1972 were recognised as protected workmen. This order was passed on the same day on which the matter was heard on November 28 1972 The company passed its dismissal order of these three main office-bearers in the morning of November 28 1972 and therefore the three petitioners had filed the present complaint under sec. 33A as admittedly Reference I. T. No. 44 of 1972 was pending before this Tribunal. That complaint having been dismissed on the aforesaid preliminary point the petitioners have challenged the order of the Tribunal

(3.) The material sec. 33 runs as under:-