J B BENERJEE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. K. Seth, J. Mr. S. N. Verma, counsel appearing for the petitioners raises an interesting question as to whether there could be a second reference under Section 4-K of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act', after having once refused to refer the matter under the provisions of the said Act and whether the State Government had the power to review or revise its own order passed under Section 1-K of the said Act at an earlier point of time even when no fresh material has been proceed and when there is no finding that the earlier representa tion was based on frault on fraudulent representation or whether such a reference could be made without giving any opportunity to the employed when once earlier declined.

(2.) HE further contends that the second reference having been made on me basis of a recommendation made by the Minister, the same is without application of mind. Another contention of his is that the petitioners' organisation is not an industry and the said fact has not been taken into account. HE contended further that nothing has been indicated as to what was the report earlier and why the same is being departed or deviated from and, therefore, the reference is void. His last contention was that the reference relates to a stale case became of long lapse of time in between.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Counsel Mr. A. P. N. Giri appear ing on behalf of the respondents contends that the writ petition is premature since the present question could be raised as preliminary objection before the Industrial Tribunal and could be decided therein. He further contends that Article 350 of the Constitution entitles a person to make a representation. If a representation is made, the same is to be decided in accor dance with law and has been so decided and, therefore, the same cannot be questioned. He contends further that the reference made by the Minister is to be treated as a reference by the Government. He relies on the case of Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1974 SC 2192, In support of his contention that a Ministers' reference is a reference by the Government.