J P GUPTA Vs. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the Order dated 28 th of June, 2002 passed by the Industrial Court, Bench at Bhopal whereby the appeal filed by the respondents against the award passed by the Labour Court has been allowed and the award has been set aside on the ground that dispute was raised by the petitioners with respect to the validity of an agreement executed by the employees' union with the employer with respect to the enhancement of the retrenchment compensation and it was further contended that the action of retrenchment of the petitioners by the employer was unsustainable in eye of law because of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 25-N of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After adducing the evidence, the Labour Court reached to the conclusion that such an agreement by the Union was not in accordance with law and, therefore, the said agreement was declared to be invalid and illegal. Similarly the Labour Court reached to the conclusion that though a sanction was obtained for closure of the factory of the respondents, but it was necessary to comply with the provisions of Section 25-N of the Act and since it was not complied with, the petitioners were illegally retrenched on account of closure of the factory of respondents. It is contended that against said award, an appeal was preferred by the respondent employer and though the provisions of law were made clear, reliance was placed in several decisions of the Apex Court, wrongly relying the decisions which were not applicable, appeal of the respondent employer has been allowed, therefore, this writ petition is required to be filed.

(2.) A tragedic incident took place in the factory of respondents at Bhopal in intervening night of 2nd /3rd December, 1984. A prohibitory order was issued by the State Govt. to shut down the factory. Thereafter respondents moved an application for grant of sanction for closure of factory under section 25-O of the Act which was allowed and sanction was granted on the terms of payment of compensation to the existing workmen and to offer them employment in other units of respondents, if possible. Notice was given, compensation was paid and the factory was closed. There was an agreement said to be entered into between the employer and workers' Union for extra payment of compensation. Thereafter, challenging the said agreement and complaining non-compliance of provisions of section 25-N of the Act, thus seeking to set aside retrenchment claim, was made before the Labour Court, Bhopal, which was allowed. The appeal was preferred by the employer before the Industrial Court which was allowed by the impugned order, hence this writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) It is contended by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the law is well settled by the decisions of the Apex Court in several cases. Before amendment in the provisions of the Act, the operation of the law was different and different provisions were there for payment of compensation to workmen who were terminated on account of closure of any establishment. However, after the decisions rendered by the Apex Court in certain cases, the amendments were made in the provisions of the Act and now it has become necessary to comply with the provisions of Section 25-N of the Act even if the establishment is closed on account of sanction granted by a competent Government. It is contended that this particular aspect has not been considered by the appellate authority and appeal of the respondents has illegally been allowed, therefore, order passed by Appellate Authority is liable to be set aside and that of the Labour Court is liable to be affirmed.