JAY ENGG. WORKS LTD. Vs. IV INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO . 2696 -1. R.IR/10L -219/71 Whereas an industrial dispute exists between Messrs. Eastern India Usha Corporation (a division of the Jay Engineering Works Ltd.) 10, Middleton Row, Calcutta -16, and their workmen represented by Jay Engineering Employees' Union, 113/2, Hazra Road, Calcutta -26 relating to the matter specified in the Schedule below, being a matter specified in the Third Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act XIV of 1947); And whereas under the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department Order No. 421 -I.R. /IR/10L -219/71 dated the 31st January, 1972 the said industrial dispute was referred to the Second Industrial Tribunal, constituted under this Department Notification No 808 -I.R. /IR/3A -2/57 dated the 11th March, 1957 for adjudication; And whereas the said Second Industrial Tribunal is without any Judge and it is expedient that the proceedings of the said Industrial dispute should be withdrawn from the file of the said Second Industrial Tribunal and transferred to some other Tribunal for speedy disposal; Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 33B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act 14 of 1947), the Governor is pleas -ed hereby to withdraw the proceedings of the said industrial dispute from the Second Industrial Tribunal and transfer the same for disposal to the Fourth Industrial Tribunal constituted under Notification No. 808 -I.R/IR/8A/2/57 dated the 11th March, 1957; The said Fourth Industrial Tribunal shall for this purpose meet at such places and on such dates as it may direct. The Schedule. Dearness allowance for the teaching staff and darwans of Usha Sewing Schools. By order of the Governor N.R. Sircar. Asst. Secy. to the Govt. of West Bengal. No. 2696/2(5) -IR.

(2.) IT transpired that the Judge of the Second Industrial Tribunal had retired on 2nd January, 1972 and there was no fresh appointment made until the second order of reference was made Section 33B reads as follows: (1) The appropriate Government may, by order in writing and for reasons to be stated therein withdraw any proceedings under this Act pending before a Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal and transfer the same to another Labour Court. Tribunal, or National Tribunal, as the case may be, for the disposal of the proceeding and the Labour Court Tribunal or National Tribunal to which the proceeding is so transferred may, subject to special directions in the order of transfer proceed either de novo or from the stage at which it was so transferred.

(3.) IN the affidavit -in -opposition it has been stated that the former Judge of the Second Industrial Tribunal had retired on 2nd January, 1972. That being the position, it is argued that on the date of the first reference there was no Judge in the said Second Industrial Tribunal and, accordingly, the reference was invalid. It is contended that under Section 7A the appropriate Government would constitute the Tribunal and would appoint one person only as the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal. Under Section 8 of the said Act the appointment was to be made in case of vacancy. It is urged that neither the reference could validly be made to such a Tribunal which had no Judge nor could such reference be called a pending reference within the meaning of Section 33B. It is contended that if the Presiding Officer is not in existence then there cannot be any question of any reference being pending before him. Mr. Banerjee has further urged that from the affidavit -in -opposition filed on behalf of the Government it transpired for the first time that the employees union made an application for such withdrawal and transfer by its letter dated 25th April, 1972 which was received by the Government on May 5, 1972. This has not been communicated to Mr. Banerjee's client and, accordingly, this unilateral transfer is illegal and no opportunity having been given to the appellant there was violation of the rules of natural justice.