S K CHATTERJEE Vs. EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the workmen of Selected Fatka Colliery against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court whereby the learned Judge made absolute the Rule Nisi issued on the application of the respondent no. 1, Eastern Coal Fields Limited, a Government Company, under article 226 of the Constitution and quashed the order dated October 11, 1982 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour court No. 3, Dhanbad.

(2.) THE appellants who are 1175 in number were workmen of the selected Fatka Colliery. Under the Coal Mines (taking over management) Ordinance, 1973, which came into effect from January 31, 1 973, the management of the said colliery was taken over by the custodian. The Custodian, however, came to know that a Receiver had been appointed by the Calcutta High Court in respect of the said colliery sometime in 1952 in a Mortgage Suit filed in 1 950. After coming to know of the same, the Custodian handed over possession of the colliery to the Receiver. The Ordinance was repealed and replaced by the Coal Mines (taking over management) Act, 1973. Thereafter, the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973, hereinafter referred to as the Nationalisation Act was enacted and it came into force with effect from 1st May, 1973 The Nationalisation Act, was amended by the Coal Mines Nationalisation (Amendment) Act, 1976. By the Amendment Act, a new sub-section (3)was inserted in section 3 of the Nationalisation Act. Sub-section (3), inter alia, provides that no person other than the Central government or a Government company or a corporation owned, managed or controlled by the Central Government etc. shall carry on coal mines operation in India, in any form.

(3.) IT is the case of the respondent writ petitioner that it obtained possession of the colliery on or about October 14, 1976 after the Receiver was appointed by this Court. After taking possession of the colliery, it found that the colliery was completely damaged due to improper and unscientific operation of the mines at the time the Receiver was in possession. It is alleged that it was only in February 1979 that the respondent writ petitioner was able to raise coal from the colliery.