HARBANS LAL MALHOTRA & SONS LIMITED WORKMENS UNION AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Soumya Majumder, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner union. He submits, claim for relief is consequences of having retrenched union members in spite of appropriate Government having had denied permission to retrench. He refers to order dated 18th August, 2015 passed by the company in which it said, application under section 25N of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking permission for retrenchment of 150 workmen was made on 9th October, 2014. Government did not communicate its order granting or refusing to grant permission by 7th December, 2014 being date on which sixty days from making application expired. Hence, having deemed permission, company went ahead and retrenched. Mr. Majumder then refers to order dated 5th December, 2014 of Government of West Bengal, Office of Labour Commissioner by which permission was unambiguously refused and application rejected. The letter is addressed to Director of the Company.

(2.) He relies on affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Company to demonstrate from disclosures at pages 25 and 26 therein, order dated 5th December, 2014 of appropriate Government denying permission to retrench was dispatched by India Post at 12.30 PM on 9th December, 2014 being 60th day from date of application made. Track report appearing at page 27 of affidavit-in-opposition confirms the position. He relies on section 4 of Contract Act, 1872 to submit, communication was complete against appropriate Government when it put its denial of permission into course of transmission to the Company so as to be out of its power. So, he submits, the Company in proceeding to retrench members of his client has committed an offence as having had acted contrary to provisions in section 25N. As such, provisions in section 32 become attracted and applicable to the Company. There should be direction accordingly.

(3.) Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Company. He submits, sub-section (4) in section 25N is what falls for consideration in this case. Said sub-section is reproduced below:-