SUNDRAMOORTHY M Vs. COMMR OF LABOUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is for issue of writ of certorified mandamus calling for the records relating to the Order No. A2/79970/93, dated February 28, 1994, passed by the Commissioner of Labour in 2-A Dispute cases and quash the same and also to direct the first respondent to submit a failure report as required by Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(2.) The petitioners were working in the second respondent-company Jonas Woodhead and Sons (India) Ltd. During October, 1992, the management was spreading a rumour that the industry was to be closed; and that if anyone wanted to go out, they may get compensation and go out of the employment. The management forced all the workers to submit their resignation letters and paid certain amounts stating that was towards full and final settlement. Hence, industrial disputes were raised challenging such retrenchment. Before the Labour Officer, the management took a stand that the management and the union had entered into a settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, on October 19, 1992 based on the decision taken by the General Body of the union whereby the workers agreed to resign and the management agreed to accept the resignation and pay certain amounts in full and final settlement. Accordingly the claims of the workmen had been settled and hence, they have no locus standi to claim reinstatement by raising industrial dispute. The Labour Officer refused to initiate conciliation and to submit a failure report as per Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act inspite of several issues that were raised. Instead, the various issues raised before the Labour Officer were adjudicated on merits by the Labour Officer and the Labour Officer sent letters, dated March 2, 1993 and March 3, 1993, taking that the disputes cannot be entertained, since the issue in dispute is covered by Section 12(3) settlement. Subsequently, the President of the union sent reconsideration petition to the Commissioner of Labour explaining the facts of the case and arising disputes numbering 34.

(3.) The Commissioner of Labour by order dated February 28, 1994 dismissed the consideration petition. In that order, the Commissioner of Labour had delved into the merits of the case and adjudicated upon the disputes of the case. Therefore, the orders of the Labour Officer as confirmed by the Commissioner of Labour is liable to be set aside.