K K RATTAN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition presented by the workman questioning the legality of the order made by the Labour Court, Chandigarh, dismissing the reference made under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, (hereinafter called the Act), for non-prosecution, the following question of law arises for consideration:-

(2.) The brief facts of the case are these. The petitioner raised a dispute that the termination of his services by the second respondent was not justified. The State Government in exercise of the powers under Section 10 of the Act, referred the dispute for industrial adjudication. The point of dispute referred for adjudication reads :-

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is that when a reference is made under Section 10 of the Act to the Labour Court, having regard to the scheme of the Act, the Labour Court is bound to answer the reference on merits, but it cannot be dismissed for default or for non-prosecution. The learned counsel for the respondent, however, contended that when the workman, at whose instance the reference was made, remained absent, there was nothing further to be done by the Labour Court and, therefore, the Labour Court was justified in dismissing the reference. It is these rival contentions that have given rise to the question which we have set out in the first paragraph of this order.