GARDEN SILK MILLS LTD Vs. ASHOK K JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir Thakore with learned advocate Mr. N. A. Pandya on behalf the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. K. M. Patel with learned advocate Mr. Dipak R. Dave on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

(2.) IN the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Industrial Court in Appeal (IC) No. 18 of 2001 dated 9. 3. 2006 whereby the Industrial Court has allowed the appeal filed by the respondents and declared that by notice dated 4. 5. 1996, the change is considered to be illegal which requires to be withdrawn and re-transfered the respondents workmen to the original place and post.

(3.) ACCORDING to petitioner, on 4. 5. 1996, the respondents workmen were working in the Crimping Department of the petitioner company transferred to the Twisting Department as the Twisting Operator by a written order. The respondents have challenged the said order by way of Original Application No. 40 of 1996 before the Labour Court, Surat. The Surat Silk Mills Union also filed Application No. 26 of 1996 regarding the same dispute. On 6. 1. 1997, the said application came to be decided. Thereafter, the respondents had filed Revision Application No. 2 of 1987 and 4 of 1987 against the order passed by Labour Court, Surat which were admitted partly and the main application was remanded back to the Labour Court, Surat. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a writ petition being SCA No. 9139 of 1999 before this Court and matter was remanded back to the Labour Court with a direction for fresh hearing. The Labour Court, after giving equal opportunity to the parties to produce the evidence, passed the order dismissing the original application No. 22 of 1996 and 26 of 1996. The respondents then filed appeal (IC) No. 18 of 2001 before the Industrial Court, Surat against the order of the Labour Court. The Industrial Court, Surat by its judgment and order dated 9. 3. 2006 has held that the transfer of the respondents from Crimping Department to Twisting Department was illegal on the ground that the transfer was not a mutual transfer in both the departments and that the petitioner company had failed to comply with the requirements under Item Nos. 1 and 2 of Schedule-II of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act,1946 and that the respondents should be shifted to their original posts.