ORIENT PAPER MILLS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners seek to challenge Annexure-16 to the petition which is order dated January 6, 2003 passed by the Government of Orissa rejecting the prayer of the petitioners for making a reference for adjudication of the dispute by a Tribunal in terms of Section 25-0(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(2.) Case of the petitioners, in brief, is that petitioner No. 1-Orient Paper Mills is a unit of Orient Paper and Industries Limited situated at Brajrajnagar of Orissa. Orient Paper and Industries Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act. Petitioner No.2 is the Vice President of Orient Paper Mills. Petitioner No.1-company made an application on December 29, 1998 before the Government of Orissa for closure of its industrial unit under the provisions of Section 25-O of the said Act. In the said application various grounds for such closure were stated. Upon hearing petitioner No. 1-employer and others, the State Government of Orissa by its order dated December 29, 1998 rejected the closure application. Grievance of the petitioners is that they assigned various grounds for such closure. But, all those grounds have not been dealt with in the order dated December 29, 1998 issued by the Government of Orissa rejecting the petitioners' prayer for closure of the unit.

(3.) Again on April 24, 2001 another application for such closure was made before the Government of Orissa stating therein various grounds in support of the prayer for closure. Written notes of arguments were also filed before the State Government on behalf of the petitioners. However, the State Government again by its order dated June 14, 2001 rejected the aforesaid second application of the petitioners for closure of their industrial unit. Here also grievance of the petitioners is that various grounds were assigned in the application of the petitioners for closure of their industrial unit. Facts and figures in support of the grounds were also placed before the State Government. However, without dealing with such facts and figures and grounds, the Government by its order dated June 14, 2001 again rejected the prayer of the petitioners for closure of their industrial unit. Soon thereafter on July 11, 2001 an application was filed on behalf of the petitioners in terms of Section 25-O(5) of the said Act for review of the order of the Government dated June 14, 2001 by which prayer of the petitioners for closure of the industrial unit was turned down. The said application dated July 11, 2001 seeking review was also turned down by the Government by a cryptic order dated March 6, 2002 without dealing with various grounds taken by the petitioners in their application seeking review. The order dated March 6, 2002 passed by the Government rejecting the aforesaid prayer for review reads as under: