TATA MOTORS LTD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief:

(2.) THE main contention raised by the learned senior Counsel Mr. V.P. Singh appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the order passed under Section 33'C'(2) of Industrial Dispute Act is without jurisdiction and not maintainable. He further submits that there was no employer and employee relationship and there was no determination of any dispute more so when the earlier amended reference dated 5.7.1995 specifically referred the dispute with regard to employer and employee relationship for adjudication. The further case of the petitioner is that in any event the impugned order dated 20.12.2003 is barred by the principles of res -judicata.

(3.) BE that as it may, there is no dispute about the fact that even in the earlier round petition under Section 33'C'(2) of Industrial Dispute Act was moved before learned labour Court, Jamshedpur on behalf of the same workmen and by a detailed speaking order dated 2.2.81 it was held as under: 7. 'Admittedly the applicant are not workmen of Telco; rather they are workmen of the said three contractor's, so their claim for wages and benefits at par with the wages and benefit of the workmen of Telco can not be decided in a proceeding Under Section 33'C'(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act. If they have any grievance on this score they are at liberty to raise an industrial dispute. In the result, it is therefore.