VISWABHARATHI WELFARE PRINTING PRESS # TAHSILDAR HYD URBAN TALUK Vs. VISWABHARATHI WELFARE PRINTING PRESS # TAHSILDAR HYD URBAN TALUK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What are the relative ambits of sub-sections 1 and 2 of Section 33 (C) of the INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 1947? That is the question which is raised in this writ petition,

(2.) The petitioner is a firm represented by its manager. Therewere as many as four respondents including (1) the Tahsildar, Hyderabad, Urban Taluk, (2) the Government of Andhra Pradesh respresented by Second Secretary, Home (Labour Department), (3) the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Hyderabad, Twin Cities and (4) Viswabharathi Printing Press Employees Union. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner's turm is Viswabharathi Welfare Printing Press. On the statement that the 4th respondent Union had ceased to exist, this court by its order dated 15-9-1976 dismissed the writ petition as against the respondent. With the consequance now only the first three respondents remain.

(3.) Due to some troubles the petitioner firm retrenched some of its employees in the month of March, 1974. The employees union, which was the 4th respondent, raised an Industrial Dispute about it. The second respondent referred it to the Industrial Tribunal and that was I.D. No. 3 of 1974. The Tribunal passed an award and it was published in the Gazette of Andhra Pradesh on 10-7-1975. That means that award came into force 30 days after the date of publication of the award. For the purpose of the present writ petition, the entire award is not necessary, but paragraph 24, which contains the operative portion, will have, to be read in order to decide the question now raised.