ISMAIL PAPAMIA Vs. LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition raises a rather interesting question of construction of Sections 7 and 9, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, (Act 20 of 1946 ).

(2.) THE second respondent company applied to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33, Industrial Disputes Act, for permission to dismiss 27 of its employees. Its contention was that there was an illegal strike on 11-11-1953. of the workers of the company, that these 27 employees had participated in the illegal strike and they had also refused to obey lawful orders. It was further the contention of the second respondent company that a proper inquiry as re-quired by the standing Orders had been held, that, the charge of misconduct with regard to these two acts had been established and therefore under the Standing Orders the Company was entitled to inflict the penalty of dismissal upon these 27 workers. The Industrial Court granted permission with regard to 3 out of the 27 employees and refused permission with regard to 24, and the reason that induced the Industrial Tribunal to come to this conclusion was that the respondent company had failed to comply with the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, that no translation in. Marathi of the Standing Orders had been posted on special boards and therefore the 27 employees who did not know English had no notice of the Standing Orders. Therefore, the Standing Orders were not binding upon those 24 employees and no proper Inquiry could be deemed to have been held as required by the Standing Orders. With regard to the other three employees, as they knew English, and a copy of the standing Orders had been posted on the notice board, the Tribunal took the view that, the Standing Orders were binding upon those 3 employees and gave the necessary permission to the respondent company. It was also urged by the respondent company in the alternative that the dismissal could be justified under the ordinary law of Master and Servant. This contention was also rejected by the Industrial Tribunal. The employer company went in appeal to the Labour Appellate Tribunal. The Labour Appellate Tribunal did not accept the construction put by the Industrial Tribunal upon Sections 7 and 9 of the Act and remanded the matter to the Industrial Tribunal, and the employees have now come on this petition.

(3.) TURNING to the two relevant sections, Section 7 provides: