PRAFULLA KUMAR NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party No.5 Management, i.e., HINDALCO Industries Limited, entered its appearance through Mr. B.P. Tripathy, Advocate, who filed the Vakalatnama.

(2.) The petitioner is the General Secretary of HINDALCO Staff Association, who has filed this writ petition to declare the references under Annexures 1 series made by the Government of Odisha, in its Labour and ESI Department under Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referredto as 'the Act') to the Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar as incomplete and to issue a direction to the opposite party State Government to incorporate a further question, i.e., "whether the unfair labour practices adopted by M/s. HINDALCO Industries Limited under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and/or justified ?" in the order of reference.

(3.) Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner association was aggrieved by the action of the management with regard to the non-recognition of protected workmen and change of designation, salary/wage structure as well as decision of the management with regard to "no work no pay" system inasmuch as the harassment caused by the management to the members of the petitioner - association by transferring some members to other sick industries outside Odisha. The petitioner association put forth the above grievances before the labour authorities through numerous representations and the District Labour Officer, on 06.05.2001, directed the management to maintain status quo in the larger interest of the industries, as it was adopting unfair labour practices.