SWARANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is directed against an order passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta, affirming an order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Calcutta, under S. 29, read with S. 32 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience).

(2.) By an awed dated 29.9.1970 made by the First Labor Court, west Bengal, under the Provisions of the Act, the petitioners were directed to reinstate one prabir Kumar Ghosh in his employment under the petitioner no. 1, Messrs Swaranjit and Company (of which thee petitioner no 2 Swaranjit Singh, was a proprietor) with full back wages from 15.4.1969. The award was published in the Calcutta Gazette, Extraordinary, on 23-11-1970. The petitioners did not thereafter reinstate P. K. Ghosh. By a letter dated 11-1-1970, P. K. Ghosh asked the petitioner no 1 company to reinstate him with full back wages, as per the terms of the award. As he was not there-after reinstated, he wrote a letter dated 7.12.1970 to the Deputy Labor did not enforce the award. Subsequently, on the complaint of the opposite party no. 2, an Assistant Labor Commissioners, Government of West Bengal against the petitioners under S 29. Read with S. 32 of the Act, a case was started against the petitioners. Two witnesses were examined for the prosecution Prabir Kumar Ghosh was examined as P.W.1. One witness was examined for the petitioners. On a consideration of the evidences of these witnesses and the materials on record, the learned metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Calcutta, Convicted both the petitioners under S. 29, read with S. 32 of the Act. Each of the petitioners knows. 1 and 2 was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000. There were directions in the order of conviction passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for issue of distress warrant against the petitioner no 1, if the fine was not paid. The petitioner no 2 were to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, in default of payment of fine. The learned Magistrate directed that out of the total fine, if realized, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- was to be paid to Shri P. K. Ghosh by way of compensation. This order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate was affirmed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Calcutta. Being aggrieved by this order of the learned Chief Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1979, the petitioner's necks 1 and 2 have filed the present provisional application.

(3.) Mr. Ghosh, learned Counsel for the petitioners, has challenged the dismissal of the appeal by the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta, on several grounds. His first contention is that when an offence for breach of award is punishable under S. 29 of the Act with in presentment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine or with both, the cognizance of the offence for breach of award under S. 29 of the Act was bared by limitation. Under S. 468(2) Cr. P. C. The second contention of Mr. Gosh is that the order of conviction and sentences should not be allowed to stand in the absence of proof by the prosecution of any means reason the part of the petitioners. The third contention is that both the courts bellow erred in thinking that the award was not terminated by a notice dated 4.11.1974 sent by the petitioners under certificate of posting.