MANAGEMENT OF MOTORS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by award dated 24.02.2012, the petitionerManagement of M/s Motors Limited (Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Limited) now Tata Motors Limited has challenged the validity of notification dated 17.09.1998. Sri Shashi Anugrah Narayan, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that, the challenge to the validity of notification dated 17.09.1998 may be decided as a preliminary issue. It is submitted that, the challenge of the petitioner to notification dated 17.09.1998 is the core issue involved in the writ petition because it goes to the root of the matter. With the consent of the parties the said issued has been heard as a preliminary issue.

(2.) Referring to notification dated 28.04.1998, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that, after having recorded a satisfaction that an industrial dispute exists between "the Management of M/s Telco Recreation Club, Jamshedpur and their workmen represented by Sri Indra Deo Prasad" and accordingly, referring the matter to the Labour Court, Jamshedpur for adjudication, it was not open to the Appropriate Government to modify/amend the said notification, unilaterally. It is stated that, by a subsequent notification dated 17.09.1998 the earlier notification has been modified/amended in as much as, in place of M/S Telco Recreation Club, Jamshedpur, the name of the petitioner has been substituted without any notice to the petitioner. It is further stated that M/s Telco Recreation Club is a separate entity registered under the Societies Registration Act and in Reference No. 06 of 1981, it has been held that M/s Telco Recreation Club has a separate identity. It is submitted that, on the application of the respondent no. 2 the Deputy Labour Commissioner issued notice to the petitioner and the petitioner appeared and filed its reply denying that the concerned workmen are its employees. On failure of the conciliation proceeding a report was sent to the Government of Bihar which after examining the matter vide notification dated 28.04.1998 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court, Jamshedpur. Relying on decision in "State of Bihar Vs. M/s Bata Shoe Company Limited and Others, 1958 AIR(SC) 1018", the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that, the Appropriate Government has no power to cancel or supercede reference made under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

(3.) As against the above, Mr. Ajit Kumar, the learned Senior counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits that, the question of validity of notification dated 17.09.1998 raised by the petitioner is barred by constructive resjudicata. It is submitted that, notification dated 17.09.1998 does not amend or modify the reference which was made by notification dated 28.04.1998. A grievance on behalf of the concerned workmen was raised for payment of salary and other benefits at par with the regular workmen of M/s Telco Limited, Jamshedpur and thus, the dispute was between the Management of M/s Telco Limited and the cornered workmen and therefore, the substitution of M/s Telco Limited in place of M/s Telco Recreation Club was appropriate. It is further submitted that after a fullfledge trial and having failed to challenge the validity of notification dated 17.09.1998 in W.P.(L) No. 4462 of 2003, the petitioner cannot be permitted to challenge the same in the present proceeding. Referring to various paragraphs in the writ petition and averments in I.A. No. 451 of 2013, the learned Senior Counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that, the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands. Though a copy of notification dated 17.09.1998 was filed as Annexure3, in W.P.(L) No. 4462 of 2003, an application being I.A. No. 451 of 2013 has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondent no. 1 for producing a copy of the said notification. It is stated that, though the reference was made in the year, 1998 and the award was made in the year, 2012, the benefit of the award has not been extended to the concerned workmen even after lapse of more than twenty five years and they have been made to suffer.