MAZDOOR SABHA GANGA SUGAR MILLS Vs. LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two writ petitions are before the Court challenging the award of the Labour Court, Meerut. One writ petition has been filed by the workers through their Union, Mazdoor Sabha, Ganga Sugar Mills. Twenty two workmen have been denied reinstatement. The petition seeks to have the award quashed. This writ petition is No. 4401 of 1984. The other is a petition by the employer, hereinafter referred to as such, by which thirty eight workmen have the benefit of an order of the Labour Court, aforesaid, for reinstatement. Aggrieved the employer seeks quashing of the award. The employer is Messrs Gangeshwar Limited, Deoband, District Saharanpur engaged in the manufacturing of crystal sugar. Both the awards are dated within one day of each other. The award in the workmen's petition is dated November 22, 1983 arising out of Adjudication Case No. 35 of 1976. The award which the employer has challenged arises out of Adjudication Case No. 20 of 1976 (old Adjudication Case No. 429 of 1971), and is dated November 21, 1983.

(2.) But, the issues arises out of an incident which occurred eighteen years ago on the night of March 29/30, 1971 when the employer contends, the entire factory was plunged into darkness, with the result that in this continuous process industry the turbines tripped and the production came to a halt. The employers made an allegation of sabotage. There was firing by the police on the premises of the factory. Two workmen were killed. There were several who were injured and others had their bones broken. The district administration had imposed Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the vicinity of the Factory.

(3.) Charge sheets were issued and action was taken against 161 workmen. There was a domestic enquiry and all were dismissed. Since their dismissal and today, several writ petitions were filed before the Court. There were Special Appeals before the High Court. The matter had even been to the Supreme Court. Between several remand orders in the writ petitions filed by either the employer or the union representing the workmen, one aspect is clear that in adjudication all the disputes between the union and the employer arising out of the incident of March 29/30, 1971 ought to have been decided by one adjudication. Unfortunately, this did not happen. The issues arising out of a common incident, between the same parties and requiring the same evidence were referred by three adjudications. Inconsistency of decision making thus was about to become a possibility. This background is relevant. As the parties to the disputes were broken up in three adjudications, against the decisions of two of them, the present two writ petitions are before the Court.