S CHAKRAVARTY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two cases have been listed for hearing on remand by the Supreme Court. Before we refer to the remand order we may mention what the cases are about.

(2.) CRIMINAL Misc. No. 5702 of 1986 has been filed on behalf of five petitioners claiming to be the Directors of Ashoka Cement Limited, a subsidiary of Rohtas Industries Limited, having its factory premises at Dalmia Nagar in the district of Rohtas, for quashing the order of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sasaram taking cognizance against them in Official Complaint Case No. 12 of 1985. The petitioners are alleged to have closed the factory in violation of the provisions of section 25 -O of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short, &aposthe Act&apos) and thereby committed offence punishable under section 25 -R of the Act with imprisonment extending to six months, or with fine extending to Rs. five thousand, or both. A Division Bench of this Court by judgment and order dated 17.10.1996 held that two of the petitioners had moved this Court earlier in Criminal Misc. No. 2928 of 1986 challenging the very same order of the Magistrate which was dismissed and, therefore, it was not open to the petitioners to re -agitate the same point, and accordingly dismissed the application.

(3.) WE observed in course of hearing that though Special Leave Petitions/Appeals of these petitioners were disposed of in the same terms as Civil Appeal No. 3455 of 1990 the fact of the matter is that the decision of Allahabad High Court giving rise to the Special Leave Petition by Rashtriya J.S. Tyres Karamchari Union was a contrary decision. Whereas the Allahabad High Court had held the provisions of section 6 -W of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act to be invalid, this Court had upheld constitutional validity of section 25 -O of the Central Act in the case ot Hindalco Industries Limited (supra), following which the writ petition of the petitioners i.e. Cr.W.J.C. No. 202 of 1986 had been dismissed. Sri Tara Kant Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that though the case of Rashtriya J.S. Tyres Karamchari Union in terms of which the Special Leave Petitions of these petitioners were allowed, arose in a different situation, the fact remains that they were allowed in the same terms. It was pointed out that in these cases also the certain events had taken place during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court which have a bearing on the prosecution of the petitioners. He however, fairly stated that the so far issue of constitutional validity of section 25 -O of the Act is concerned, the same is covered by the above decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Orissa Textile & Steel Limited V/s. State of Orissa and others, (2002) 2 S.C.C. 578. He thus confined his submissions to the validity of the prosecution of the petitioners which is the subject matter of Criminal Misc. No. 5702 of 1986.