ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION Vs. ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the Union of Workers of Messrs The Aluminium Industries, Ltd. , Hirakud, against the appellate order of the District judge, under Section 6 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)Act 1948.

(2.) THE management of Messrs Aluminium Industries prepared Draft Standing orders under Section 3 of the aforesaid Act and submitted the same to the certifying Officer, under Section 5 of the Act. Sub-clause (IX) of Clause 32 of the said draft orders which is relevant for the purpose of this application, is as follows :

(3.) MR. Govinda Das could not point out any provision in the Act which either expressly or by necessary implication restricts the scope of the standing orders to acts of misconduct committed by workmen within the premises ot the factory only. On the other hand the Preamble makes it clear that the standing orders should deal with "conditions of employment of workers in Industrial establishments". These words are wide enough to include acts which may De committed even out of the factory premises. There is a recent decision of the Supreme Court cited by the learned lower Court namely AIR 1961 SC 1189 where it was held that a drunken brawl outside the premises of a factory would amount to misconduct within the meaning of Standing Orders No. 29 (5);. referred to in that decision. Apparently the draft standing orders here clearly try to give statutory recognition to the principle laid down in the aforesaid-Supreme Court decision.