MOHON RICE MILL Vs. HAZARIKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS rule was issued on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus or certiorari or any other prerogative writ for quashing an award passed by the Judge, Industrial Tribunal, Assam, directing reinstatement of one Abdur Rahman to his office as a truck driver with back pay for the period he was out of office.

(2.) THE facts shortly put are that Md. Abdur Rahman claimed to be an employee in the service of the management of Messrs. Mohon Rice Mill, Tezpur. He was a driver drawing Rs. 105 per month and was employed on 5 May 1954, and worked up to 16 July 1955 on which date he was dismissed without any notice and without assigning any reason for his dismissal. It was alleged that the management did not follow the procedure laid down under the standing orders applicable to all industrial establishments in Assam and acted in contravention of Section 12(a) or 14(4) of the aforesaid standing orders.

(3.) THE management of Messrs. Mohon Rice Mill, Tezpur, belonging to Sri Mangilal Agarwalla, filed a written statement contesting the claim of the driver. The contention of the mill was that Abdur Rahman was not an employee of the mill but he was a driver and a personal employee of Sri Mangilal Agarwalla, the owner of the mill. His duty was to drive a public carrier vehicle which belonged to Mangilal Agarwalla and it was his personal property. Abdur Rahman was not a workman of the mill and he had no dispute with the mill as such. It was further alleged that there was no dispute, which could be a subject -matter of reference under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act and as such the tribunal had no jurisdiction to go into the matter.