MAZGAON DOCK LIMITED Vs. SHIVBRAT JAGROOP MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Central Government Company and its shares are held by the President of India. It is engaged in the business of construction of warships, submarines and ship repairs. It employs about 10,000 employees.

(2.) THE respondent workman has filed a complaint of Unfair Labour Practice under Item 9 of Schedule IV under sections 28 and 30 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, the State Enactment. The complaint is still pending before the Industrial Court, Maharashtra at Mumbai. We are not concerned with facts and the merits of the complaint, and therefore, I am not referring to the factual aspect of the complaint.

(3.) THE petitioner company filed an application before the Industrial Court praying for dismissal of the complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the Industrial Court under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act to entertain and try such complaint in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of (Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Unions and others), reported in 1997 (1) L. L. J. 1113 (S. C. ). The petitioner company being a public sector undertaking is controlled by the Government of India and therefore the appropriate Government for the said company is the Central Government and not the State Government. It was, therefore, contended on behalf of the petitioners that the Central Government being the appropriate Government for the industrial disputes between its workmen and the company the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act does not apply to the petitioner company and therefore the present complaint filed by the respondent workman was not maintainable as the Industrial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the said complaint. The Industrial Court, after hearing the parties by its reasoned order dismissed the application filed by the petitioner company praying for dismissal of the complaint on the issue of jurisdiction of the Industrial Court under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The Industrial Court held that in view of the notification dated 3-7-1998 issued under section 39 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the State Government was also the appropriate Government in respect of the petitioner company, and therefore, the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 was applicable to the petitioner company and that the complaint was maintainable before the Industrial Court under the said Act. The Industrial Court also relied on a letter addressed by the petitioner company on 15-7-1998 to the Commissioner of Labour, Maharashtra informing that the appropriate Government in respect of the petitioner company was the State Government i. e. the Government of Maharashtra. The petitioners are aggrieved by the said order of the Industrial Court and have challenged the said order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before this Court.