BHARATIYA BANDAR MAZDOOR SANGHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, SHRAMA MANTRALAYA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER of the Central Government refusing to make a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is assailed in this writ application.

(2.) THE factual arena of dispute is very limited. The Petitioner claiming to be a registered trade union of workmen working with Paradip Port Trust wanted reference of certain alleged disputes and/or difference on failure of conciliation efforts by the authorities of the Labour Department. The allegations of the Petitioner were to the effect that there was dispute/difference relating to listing of worker in the cargo handling scheme of the Paradip Port Trust (hereinafter referred to as 'the Port Authorities'). Initially there were certain discussions held between the Port Authorities and the representatives of various unions to evolve a criteria for such listing. Since the lists were not acceptable to the Unions, the matter was agitated before this Court in O.J.C. No. 157 of 1980 and some other writ applications. Said O.J.C. No. 157 of 1980 was disposed of on 7 -4 -1980 with a direction to re -examine the matter and finalizes the same within a stipulated time. Since the matter was not finalised to the choice of the workers, the impasse continued. Subsequently the, Petitioner's union which was registered in June, 1982 as a trade union espoused the cause of some of the workers. The Petitioner thereafter entered into series of discussions with the Port Authorities as well as the officials of the Labour Department. There was an attempt to conciliate and on failure thereof, a failure report was submitted to the Central Government. According to the Petitioner, since an industrial dispute existed which needed adjudication, the Central Government should have made a reference to an appropriate forum for adjudication thereof. Instead, by order dated 24 -7 -1986 which is annexed as Annexure -1 to the writ application, the Petitioner -union was intimated that there was no prima facie ground to make a reference of the dispute for adjudication by a Tribunal.

(3.) BEFORE dealing with the respective contentions, we express our concern at the fact that no Counter affidavit was filed by the Central Government or the Port Authorities even though sufficient time was granted to them. Therefore, the averments made by the Petitioner went unrebutted. The writ application was deficient in respect of certain documents. When pointed out, Mr. Jagannath Das, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the other documents which are relevant were not in the possession of the Petitioner and it was the duty of the Central Government as well as the Port Authorities to place those documents for proper adjudication. We find that a copy of the failure report which is a very vital document has not been brought on record for our consideration. It further appears that in the order refusing reference it was indicated that the same was in continuation of the Ministry of Labour's letter dated 3 -1 -1985. Since it was indicated therein that the same was in continuation of the earlier letter, it was appropriate that this document should have been filed. But for reasons best known to the parties they kept it out of record.