Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard an appeal by special leave against the Patna High Court's dismissal of a writ petition filed by Ballarpur Collieries Co., a private partnership colliery, challenging the legality of a strike by its workmen from October 4, 1960. The dispute arose after the Central Government made a reference under Section 36A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to Shri Palit, Chairman of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, seeking interpretation of provisions of the Majumdar Award of 1956 concerning the pay scale of 'Traffic' clerical staff. The appellant contended it had no workmen designated as 'Traffic' and sought to withdraw from the reference, but the Tribunal did not expressly permit withdrawal, and the Palit Award later held all parties to the original Majumdar Award bound by the interpretation. During the pendency of this reference, workers struck due to dismissal of six workmen, without giving 14 days' notice required by Standing Order No.32. The appellant filed an application before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) under Paragraph 8(1) of the Coal Mines Bonus Scheme for a declaration that the strike was illegal. The Regional Commissioner held the strike legal, an appeal to the Industrial Tribunal under Paragraph 8(4) failed, and the Patna High Court dismissed the writ petition. Before the Supreme Court, the appellant argued two main points: first, that the strike was illegal under Section 23(b) because it occurred during pendency of proceedings before the Tribunal; second, that it was illegal under Section 23(c) because it occurred during pendency of a settlement effected by the Regional Labour Commissioner, Bombay, following an earlier strike in January/February 1960. The Court held that a reference under Section 36A reopens the earlier award for limited interpretation, and since the appellant was a party to the original Majumdar Award, its non-participation or withdrawal application did not exclude it from being bound; therefore Section 23(b) applied and the strike was illegal. Regarding Section 23(c), the Court held that the workers' assurance to the Commissioner that they would not resort to future strikes and would adopt constitutional means did not amount to a contract or a matter covered by a settlement; hence Section 23(c) was not attracted. The Court allowed the appeal and declared the strike illegal under Section 23(b).
Headnote
A) Industrial Disputes - Strike During Pendency of Proceedings - Section 23(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Reference under Section 36A reopens earlier award for limited interpretation and parties to original award remain parties to subsequent reference - Workers struck during pendency of Reference No.27 of 1960 before Palit Tribunal; appellant had filed withdrawal application and did not participate, but as party to original Majumdar Award it remained bound - Held strike illegal under Section 23(b) (Para 813 E) B) Industrial Disputes - Strike in Breach of Settlement - Section 23(c) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - To attract Section 23(c), strike must be in breach of contract in respect of a matter covered by a settlement in operation - Workers' assurance to Regional Labour Commissioner not to resort to future strikes was neither a contract nor a matter covered by settlement; no specific settlement existed - Held Section 23(c) not attracted (Para 811 G) C) Industrial Disputes - Breach of Standing Order - Sections 23 and 24 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Mere breach of a Standing Order notice requirement does not render strike illegal under Sections 23 and 24 - Appellant's third contention not pressed before Supreme Court; court noted this principle - Held no illegality solely from lack of notice under Standing Order No.32
Issue of Consideration
Whether the strike during pendency of Section 36A reference before the Industrial Tribunal was illegal under Section 23(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Whether the strike during pendency of the settlement with Regional Labour Commissioner was illegal under Section 23(c); Whether breach of Standing Order No.32 rendered the strike illegal under Sections 23 and 24
Final Decision
Appeal allowed; strike declared illegal under Section 23(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Section 23(c) not attracted.
Law Points
- Section 23(b) of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 prohibits strike during pendency of proceedings before a Labour Court
- Tribunal or National Tribunal
- reference under Section 36A reopens earlier award for limited interpretation
- party to original award remains party to subsequent Section 36A reference
- Section 23(c) requires breach of contract in respect of a matter covered by a settlement in operation
- assurance to Labour Commissioner does not amount to settlement or contract
