Case Note & Summary
The appeal concerned the validity of two industrial awards made under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The State of Uttar Pradesh had referred industrial disputes between two textile/sugar mills and their workmen to conciliation officers for adjudication. The Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, Lucknow, had held the awards invalid on the ground that they were made beyond the time prescribed under clause 16 of General Order No.615, which required awards to be pronounced within 40 days from the date of reference. The State appealed by special leave to the Supreme Court. On March 15, 1951, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh issued General Order No.615 under sections 3 and 8 of the Act; clause 16 set the 40-day time limit with power of extension. By orders dated August 19, 1952, and January 28, 1953, the Governor referred the two disputes to conciliation officers, directing them to adjudicate in accordance with Order No.615, but without specifying any time. On February 18, 1953, clause 16 was amended to substitute 180 days for 40 days. In the Swadeshi Cotton Mills case, extensions were granted up to March 10, 1953, but the award was made on April 17, 1953, and an appeal was filed before the Labour Appellate Tribunal on May 13, 1953. In the Kamlapat Motilal Sugar Mills case, no extension was granted, the award was made on June 26, 1953, and the appeal was filed on July 18, 1953. The Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Ordinance, 1953 (Ordinance No.1 of 1953) came into force on May 22, 1953, inserting section 6-A in the Act and containing section 3 for removal of doubts and validation. The State argued that the amended clause 16 should apply retrospectively, making 180 days the period in the references, and that section 3 of the Ordinance validated the awards. The mills contended that the awards were invalid because they were not made within the originally fixed 40 days and were not saved by the Ordinance. The Supreme Court held that the orders of reference, by incorporating Order No.615, must be read as specifying 40 days, and the subsequent amendment to 180 days had no retrospective effect. On the construction of section 3 of the Ordinance, clause (1) validated all orders of extension made before the Ordinance, clause (2) validated awards where no judicial proceedings were pending at the commencement of the Ordinance, and clause (3) applied section 6-A to proceedings pending at the commencement. Since the appeal in the Swadeshi case was filed before the Ordinance commenced, clause (3) applied, and the award, being beyond even the last extended time, remained invalid. In the Kamlapat case, the appeal was filed after the Ordinance commenced, and the award, though beyond 40 days but within 180 days, was validated by clause (2). The Court thus held the first award invalid and the second award valid.
Headnote
A) Industrial Dispute - Time Limit for Award - Orders of reference specifying no time incorporate 40-day period under clause 16 of General Order No.615 - Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 3, 6, 8; General Order No.615 Clause 16 - The orders of reference dated August 19, 1952 and January 28, 1953 did not specify any time but directed adjudication in accordance with Order No.615, whose clause 16 required awards within 40 days; the subsequent amendment of clause 16 to 180 days on February 18, 1953 could not operate retrospectively to alter the time for references already made. Held that the orders of reference must be read as specifying 40 days, not 180 days, for awards. B) Industrial Dispute - Enlargement of Time for Award - State Government's power under section 6-A - Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 6-A; Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Ordinance, 1953, Section 2 - Section 6-A conferred power on State Government to enlarge time even after expiry of original period; the Ordinance inserted this provision retrospectively. Held that the power existed, but an award made after the last validly enlarged date remained invalid unless saved. C) Statutory Interpretation - Validation of Awards - Distinction among clauses (1), (2), (3) of Section 3 - Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Ordinance, 1953, Section 3 - Clause (1) validates orders of enlargement made prior to Ordinance; clause (2) validates awards where no judicial proceedings were pending at commencement of Ordinance; clause (3) applies section 6-A to proceedings pending at commencement. Held that an award against which appeal was pending before Ordinance (Swadeshi) fell under clause (3) and was not validated because made beyond last enlargement, while an award where appeal was filed after Ordinance (Kamlapat) was validated by clause (2). D) Industrial Dispute - Validity of Award - Distinction based on pendency of judicial proceedings - Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Ordinance, 1953, Section 3(2),(3) - In Swadeshi Cotton Mills case, award made on April 17, 1953 beyond extended time and appeal filed before Ordinance, hence clause (3) applied and award invalid; in Kamlapat Motilal Sugar Mills case, award made on June 26, 1953 beyond 40 days but within 180 days and appeal filed after Ordinance, hence clause (2) validated. Held that first award bad, second award good.
Issue of Consideration
Whether industrial awards made beyond the time specified under clause 16 of General Order No.615 were valid in law and made with jurisdiction, considering the subsequent amendment of clause 16 and the validation provisions of Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Ordinance, 1953.
Final Decision
The award in the first case (Swadeshi Cotton Mills, Civil Appeal No.14 of 1955) was submitted beyond time and was invalid and could not be validated by Section 3 of the Ordinance, but the award in the second case (Kamlapat Motilal Sugar Mills, Civil Appeal No.15 of 1955), though submitted beyond time, was validated by Section 3(2) of the Ordinance.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Industrial awards must be submitted within specified time
- order of reference incorporating general order includes time limit
- amendment to time limit not retrospective
- section 3 of U.P. Ordinance 1 of 1953 interpreted clause-wise
- clause (2) validates awards where no judicial proceedings pending at commencement
