HIRA CEMENT WORKERS UNION Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A registered Trade Union being aggrieved by order dated February 12, 1992 of the Labour and Employment Department of the Government passed under Sections 10(1) and 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, refusing to refer an industrial dispute relating to termination of services of 45 workmen, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) For better appreciation, the facts are briefly stated herein below: Opposite Party No.2 - Hira Cement Works is a Cement Factory set up by the Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa. Sivens Engineering Enterprises (Opposite Party No. 3) was the labour contractor who has supplied workmen to opposite party No.2. On March 13, 1991, the labour contractor (O.P. No.3) served notice of termination of services of 45 workmen, vide Annexure-1. The petitioner- Union filed a complaint on March 27, 1991 before the Asst. Labour Officer-cum- Conciliation officer, Bargarh with a request to initiate a conciliation proceeding. However, the conciliation proceeding ended in a failure report submitted under Section 12 (4) of the I.D. Act with an observation that no industrial dispute exists between the petitioner and opposite parties 2 and 3. In spite of receipt of failure report, the State Government adopted dilly-dally tactics and did not refer the matter for adjudication under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and the petitioner - Union was constrained to file a writ application before this Court being O.J.C. No. 4423 of 1991. This Court on November 1, 1991 disposed of the writ application with following observations.

(3.) It is submitted that the Government while exercising its power under Section 10(1) of the Act, acted illegally entering into the merits of the dispute and the order refusing to refer the matter for adjudication is illegal and contrary to law. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State Government taking the stand that under Sections 10(1) and 12(5) of the I.D. Act, the State Government has the authority to consider the failure report and decide as to whether it is a fit case for reference to the Industrial Tribunal or not. It is further stated that the status of the members of the petitioner-Union being that of contract labourers and the dispute arising out of the termination, the grievance, if any, can be adjudicated only under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 and the Central Government is the appropriate authority to mitigate the same. Another counter is filed on behalf of opposite Party No. 2 IDCOL Cement Ltd. reiterating the stand taken before the Conciliation Officer and emphatically stating that 'Industrial Disputes Act' is not applicable as opposite party No. 2 was not the employer at any point of time and that the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act are not applicable.