RELIANCE FIREBRICK AND POTTERY CO., LTD., CHANCH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, CHOTANAGPUR DIVISION, RANCHI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application by the petitioner Company under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is for issuing an appropriate writ for quashing the award dated 3-9-1965 given by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi, in Reference No. 4 of 1961.

(2.) The petitioner is a limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act and had got its manufacturing plant and works at Chanch in the district of Dhanbad for manufacturing firebricks etc. Bhusan Chandra Dhar, Diwakar Rai, Soma Munda, Abdul Razak, Nathuni Sao and Danu Munda (opposite parties 3 to 8) were the employees of the petitioner in the firebricks and pottery works at Chanch. By a notification dated 3-4-1961 (Annexure A) the Government of Bihar referred the following dispute under Sec. 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to the Labour Court at Ranchi :

(3.) The case of the petitioner with regard to opposite party No. 5 was that he overstayed after 25-2-1959 while he was on sick leave without any intimation to the petitioner and hence his service was automatically terminated under Appendix (c) of the Workers Standing Orders. Opposite parties 6 to 8 absented themselves from duty from 26-2-1959 for more than 12 days without any intimation to the petitioner and hence their services as well were automatically terminated under Rule 14 (a) of the Standing Order which provided that unauthorised absence for more than 10 days might lead to automatic termination of service. It was not necessary to serve show cause notices when the services were automatically terminated but yet they were asked on 6-3-1959 to show cause by 16-3-1959 and notices were issued to them in registered covers but they did not show any cause and hence the petitioner was compelled to terminate their services under Rule 14 (a) of the Standing Orders. The Workers filed their written statement and a copy of it has been marked Annexure C. Their case was that they were Victimised by the petitioner and opposite parties 5 to 8 further alleged that they were arrested in a rioting case and lodged in the Dhanbad Jail. It was thus physically not possible for them to resume their duties and immediately on their release on or about 14-3-1959 they wanted to resume their duties but they were prevented from doing so and were dismissed subsequently. Opposite party No. 1 gave an award dated 6-11-1961 for the reinstatement of opposite parties 3 to 8 and payment of full back wages but the petitioner being aggrieved by that award filed an application, Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 1092 of 1961 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in this Court for quashing that award. On 26-8-1964 that application was allowed, the award was set aside and the case was sent back to the labour Court for deciding it afresh in accordance with law after giving a hearing to the parties. A copy of the said judgment has been marked Annexure E. Opposite party No. 1 heard the said case again and gave a fresh award dated 3-9-1965 (Annexure F) holding that the order of dismissal of opposite parties 3 and 4 was not at all justified and similarly the termination of the services of opposite parties 5 to 8 as well was illegal. Opposite party No. 1 directed that opposite parties 3 and 4 should be reinstated from 23-11-1957 with full back wages, whereas the other workers opposite parties 5 to 8 should be reinstated from 16-3-1959 with full back wages and the union would get Rs. 500 as cost from the management. Hence the petitioner has filed this application for quashing that award.