AHMAD ALI ANSARI Vs. CHAUDHARY SIA SARAN SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts leading to the presentation of this application under Article 226 of the Constitution are these :

(2.) The Darbhanga-Laheriasarai Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. is a public utility set-vice and it supplies power and light to the public at Darbhanga and Laheriasarai. Its management (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Management") is respondent No. 3 in this case. In November, 1957, a pamphlet was published and distributed wherein defamatory and scandalous statements were made against the Management. It is alleged that the pamphlet was published for and on behalf of the workers of the said Corporation. The Management took objection to the various allegations made against it in that pamphlet, and a copy of the pamphlet was given to each of its workers and they were asked to state in writing whether that pamphlet had been printed and published with their consent. At that time, there were 108 workmen working in that Corporation. Out of them, 35 workmen replied that the said pamphlet had been printed and published with their consent. The rest of the workmen, however, denied to have had any concern with the printing and publication of that pamphlet. These 35 workmen were, therefore, asked by the Management to give their explanations, about the printing and publication of the pamphlet. After receipt of their explanations, enquiries were held by the officers of the Management in presence of the workmen concerned. One of the 35 employees offered apology and was pardoned by the Management. The remaining 34 employees, however, took a defiant attitude, which, according to the Management, was highly subversive of discipline, and, therefore, these 34 employees were charge-sheeted and ultimately discharged on the 7th of December, 1957 from their services on charges of misconduct, insubordination and acts subversive of discipline. Admittedly, the employees of this Management had formed a trade union known as Dar-bhanga Laheriasarai Electric Supply Workers Union (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Union"). The General Secretary of this Union is one Sri Hari Prasad Singh and its President is Sri Anirudh Prasad Singh. This Union, however, does not appear to have taken up the cause of these discharged workmen. By Notification No. III/DI-3018/58L-10162; dated the 13th June, 1958, the Government of Bihar in the Labour Department, however, referred the disputes for adjudication to the Labour Court, North Bihar, Muzaffarpur, under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act XIV of 1947), hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act", between the Management and its 34 discharged workmen on the point as to whether the discharge of the said 34 workmen was justified, and, if not, whether they were entitled to reinstatement or any other relief.

(3.) Notices of the reference were served on the parties, who filed written statements on the 9th of July, 1958. The case of the Management, as disclosed in its written statement, was that the reference was without jurisdiction inasmuch as the question referred for adjudication was not an industrial dispute within the meaning of the Act, and that neither the Labour Union of the under taking nor any body or any group of workmen working under the undertaking had at any time taken up the cause of these workmen, and, as such, any dispute in regard to their discharge was only an individual dispute. The Management also pleaded justification for the action taken by it against these workmen. Along with the written statement, the Management filed another application requesting the Labour Court to decide the question of jurisdiction before taking up the case on merits. Accordingly, the jurisdictional point was taken up for hearing on the 12th of August, 1958. The 34 discharged workmen desired to be represented at the hearing by one Sri Suraj Narain Singh, who claimed to be the President of the Darbhanga Laheriasarai Electric Supply Workers Union. The Management objected to the workmen being represented by the said Suraj Narain Singh on the ground that he was not the President of the Union. On hearing both parties on this point, the Labour Court held by its order dated the 15th of September, 1958 against the workmen being represented by the said Sri Suraj Narain Singh on the ground that his election, if any as the President of the Union was illegal and unconstitutional. Against this order, the workmen moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 736 of 1958, but the said miscellaneous judicial case was dismissed by this Court by its order dated the 16th ot October, 1958. The Labour Court, thereafter, fixed the 13th of November, 1958 for hearing the jurisdictional point. On that date, it appears that one of these 34 workmen, namely, Shree Narain Bhagat, appeared and filed a petition containing written arguments and submitted on behalf of all the 34 discharged workmen that they had nothing further to say on the jurisdictional point beyond what was contained in that application. Thereafter, on that date, witness No. 1 for the Management, namely, Sri K.K. Bairoliya, was examined, but his cross-examination was declined by the said Shree Narain Bhagat. Other witnesses on behalf of the Management were examined on the next day, that is, on the 14th of November, 1958, to which date this case was adjourned for further hearing, but neither the said Shree Narain Bhagat nor any other person on behalf of the workmen appeared before the Labour Court on that date, and ultimately the further hearing of the jurisdictional matter was concluded in the absence of the workmen.