UNION OF INDIA Vs. MOHAN P. GORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Union of India questions PartI award dated 11 October 2006 made by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai (CGIT) holding that All India Institute of Physical Medicines & Rehabilitation is an industry in terms of Section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (said Act).

(2.) Mr. Rui Rodrigues, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the Tribunal, in passing the impugned award, 'has contradicted its own order in Reference No.CGIT 2/581/ 1998' in respect of Aliyavar Jung National Institute for Hearing Handicapped, Mumbai, which is a similar institute. In the order made on 18 February 1999, the Tribunal has ruled that the Aliyavar Jung National Institute is not an industry within the meaning assigned to this term under Section 2(j) of the said Act. Such contradiction in terms, according to Mr. Rodrigues constitutes both, an error apparent on face of record as well as non application of mind. On this ground, Mr. Rodrigues submits that the impugned award ought to be quashed and set aside and the reference made by the Union of India itself on 27 January 2000, struck down.

(3.) There is obviously, no merit in the submission. In the first place, there is no material placed on record to establish that Aliyavar Jung National Institute is 'similar' to All India Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (said Institute), with which we are presently concerned. Secondly, rulings of Tribunals, particularly upon factual issues, hardly constitute a 'precedent'. Thirdly, although the award dated 18 February 1999 is not in issue in the present petition, perusal of the same, indicates that the reasoning therein is flawed. The Tribunal, in passing the impugned award was therefore, right in not adverting to, muchless relying upon its previous order dated 18 February 1999. Consistency may be desirable, however, consistency of errors, is certainly not a virtue.