SARVA MAZDOOR SANGH Vs. INNOVATIONS GARMENT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE.

(2.) THIS petition is directed against the Order dated 11th November 1997 of the Industrial Court Mumbai passed below Exhibit "u-3" by way of interim relief. The petitioner's who were the complainants before the Industrial Court alleged unfair labour practices on the part of the Respondents. It was the contention of the Petitioner that Respondents were employing more than 100 workmen in their factory. Respondent No. 2 displayed a notice dated 30th September 1997 and ' informed the employees that Respondent would shift its manufacturing activities to Mussoorie, District Garwal, U. P. State. It is pointed out that the Respondents do not have any factory in Mussoorie and that the contemplated closure of the industrial establishment at Parel amounts to illegal lock-out. The Industrial Court by order dated 11th November 1997 partly allowed the interim relief and directed the Respondents to make payment of wages to all the concerned workmen till 11th November 1997 and further directed to give 15 days joining time to the concerned workmen to enable them to report for work at newly shifted place of manufacturing activities. The Respondents were directed to pay the employees wages and travelling fare for their shifting to Mussoorie. It is this order which is impugned in this writ petition. As the matter involves serious question as to whether the shifting of the unit amounts to closure and/or lock-out. Rule.

(3.) THE question is on the nature of interim relief that has to be granted. The Respondents have contended that they were forced to close down on account of the notice issued by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation who by their notice had found that Respondents were carrying on the activities without permit under Sections 390 and 479 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. It is subsequent to this notice that a notice dated 3rd September 1997 was put up. In the notice it is pointed out that the Corporation has directed the Respondents to stop the manufacturing activities on the ground that the present manufacturing premises is coming under non-manufacturing zone. No material has been produced by the respondents to show any correspondence whereby the Corporation has directed the Respondents to close down their factory on account of the same coming within a non-manufacturing zone. In fact in the affidavit-in-rejoinder filed by the Petitioner it is pointed out that the structure stand at a site where originally Shakti Mills used to stand. It is also pointed out that a company called Glorious Plastics is also running on the land originally owned by Shakti Mills and that the Directors of Respondent No. 1 are the same as that of Glorious Plastics. It is contended by the Petitioners that the Junior Engineer of the Corporation whom their members contacted pointed out that if the Respondents apply for motor licence the same can be granted on the licence fee being paid. It is also pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that in fact that Respondents have no licence for a factory to start the manufacturing plant at Mussoorie. It is also contended that more than 100 workmen are involved.