Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Prakash Shamrao Bhagat and Dinkar Yeshwant Jadhav, were aggrieved by the inaction of the statutory authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, regarding their demand notices. They had earlier challenged their oral terminations before the Labour Court under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971, but their complaints were dismissed due to a 14-year delay. The learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, in Writ Petition Nos.4090/2003 and 4091/2003 decided on 07/08/2015, permitted them to raise an industrial dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Consequently, they submitted demand notices dated 29/01/2016 to the Government Labour Officer, Latur, which were received on 26/10/2018. Despite the lapse of over five years, the Appropriate Government (Deputy Labour Commissioner, Aurangabad) failed to pass any order on the demand notices. The petitioners approached the High Court seeking directions to the Appropriate Government to decide the references. The court held that the Appropriate Government is duty-bound to consider the demand notice and pass an order either making a reference or refusing to do so. The inaction was unjustified. The court directed the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Aurangabad, to decide the references within four weeks from the date of the order. The petitions were disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Reference of Dispute - Section 2-A, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Appropriate Government's Duty - The Appropriate Government is obligated to consider a demand notice under Section 2-A and pass an order either making a reference or refusing to do so. Inaction for over five years is unjustified and violates the statutory scheme. (Paras 1-6)
B) Industrial Law - Delay and Limitation - MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - The petitioners had earlier approached the Labour Court under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971, but their complaints were dismissed on the ground of delay (14 years). The High Court permitted them to raise an industrial dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which has no limitation period. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appropriate Government is obliged to pass an order on a demand notice under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and whether the inaction of the authorities is justified.
Final Decision
The court directed the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Aurangabad, to decide the references under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 within four weeks from the date of the order. The petitions were disposed of with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Industrial Dispute
- Demand Notice
- Appropriate Government
- Reference
- Section 2-A
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Delay
- Limitation
- MRTU & PULP Act
- 1971
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (12) 19
Writ Petition No. 15117 of 2023 and Writ Petition No. 12128 of 2022
Ravindra V. Ghuge, Y. G. Khobragade
Mr Suraj V. Gundre for Petitioners; Mr A. B. Girase, G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 3
Prakash Shamrao Bhagat and Dinkar Yeshwant Jadhav
The State of Maharashtra, Asst. Labour Commissioner, Dy. Labour Commissioner, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking directions to the Appropriate Government to decide the reference under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought a direction to the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Aurangabad, to pass an order on their demand notices.
Filing Reason
Inaction by the statutory authorities on the demand notices submitted by the petitioners under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Previous Decisions
Earlier, the petitioners' complaints under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 were dismissed on the ground of delay. The learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.4090/2003 and 4091/2003 decided on 07/08/2015 permitted them to raise an industrial dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Issues
Whether the Appropriate Government is obliged to pass an order on a demand notice under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?
Whether the inaction of the authorities for over five years is justified?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that despite submitting demand notices in 2016, the Appropriate Government failed to pass any order, compelling them to approach the court.
Respondents did not oppose the petitions and submitted that the Deputy Labour Commissioner would decide the references.
Ratio Decidendi
The Appropriate Government is duty-bound to consider a demand notice under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and pass an order either making a reference or refusing to do so. Inaction for an extended period is unjustified and violates the statutory scheme.
Judgment Excerpts
Though the Petitioners have raised an industrial dispute through a demand notice under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in 2018, which admittedly is received by the office of the Government Labour Officer, Latur on 26/10/2018, the Petitioners are compelled to approach this Court for seeking directions, to the Appropriate Government to pass an order.
The Appropriate Government is obliged to consider the demand notice and pass an order either making a reference or refusing to do so.
Procedural History
The petitioners initially filed complaints under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971, which were dismissed on the ground of delay. They then filed Writ Petition Nos.4090/2003 and 4091/2003, which were decided on 07/08/2015, permitting them to raise an industrial dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They submitted demand notices on 29/01/2016, received on 26/10/2018. Due to inaction, they filed the present writ petitions in 2022 and 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 2-A
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971:
