MANAGEMENT OF INDIA PISTONS LTD. Vs. I. INBAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts and circumstances necessitating the filing of the writ petition are stated hereunder:-

(2.) When the writ petition was taken up for hearing, on behalf of the respondent/workman Mr.V.Prakash, the learned Senior Counsel raised a strong objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition stating that the writ petition against the preliminary award of the Labour Court is not maintainable, as held by various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and also this Court. According to the learned Senior counsel, it is always open to the Management to challenge both the preliminary as well as the final award and their right to question the preliminary award is protected. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the Management if the writ petition is held not maintainable. But on the other hand, great prejudice would be caused to the workman, since he having been dismissed from service, cannot wait for an indefinite period for the Labour Court to pass final award. Taking into account the plight of the workmen, who were always placed in a disadvantageous position against the Managements, the Courts have consistently held that challenge to the preliminary award ought to be discouraged by the Courts, particularly, the Constitutional Court exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel would implore this Court to address the concern of the workman in this regard before dealing with the submissions to be made on behalf of the Management.

(3.) Shri.C.Mohan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Management would have strong reservation about the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the workman stating that there are several decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and the High Court entertaining the writ petitions against the preliminary awards of the Labour Court/Tribunal and therefore, it cannot be concluded that under all circumstances, the Managements are barred from approaching the Courts against preliminary awards, even if it is a question of jurisdictional error or on issues which go to the root of the matter. According to the learned counsel, it is always open to this Court to appreciate when there are genuine challenges against preliminary awards passed by the Labour Court/Tribunal. Therefore, he would request this Court to consider the contention of the petitioner Management and take a final call as to whether the final conclusion reached by the Labour Court holding that the enquiry conducted against the petitioner was not fair and proper, was supported by sufficient materials and whether the finding of the Labour Court was premised on sound reasoning.