Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hind Kamgar Sanghatana, a trade union, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an award dated 12.03.2012 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Pune, in Reference (I.T.) No.19 of 2010. The Tribunal had rejected the reference on the ground that the petitioner was not a recognised union under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, and therefore could not prosecute the reference. The High Court initially dismissed the writ petition on 10.07.2013, upholding the Tribunal's order. The petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court, which by order dated 18.07.2017 remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The Supreme Court noted that there was no recognised union under the first respondent and that the Tribunal had relied on the first proviso to Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Upon remand, the High Court heard the parties and set aside the Tribunal's award, directing the Tribunal to decide the reference on its merits. The Court held that the issue of the union's recognition should not prevent the adjudication of the industrial dispute, especially since there was no recognised union. The matter was remitted back to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Locus Standi of Unrecognised Union - Reference Rejection - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 36 proviso; Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - The Industrial Tribunal rejected the Reference on the ground that the petitioner-union was not a recognised union under the MRTU & PULP Act, relying on the first proviso to Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Supreme Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration, noting that there was no recognised union under the first respondent. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's award and directed the Tribunal to decide the Reference on merits, holding that the issue of locus standi should not bar adjudication of the industrial dispute. (Paras 2-3, 5-6)
B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Remand by Supreme Court - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - The High Court, after remand by the Supreme Court, reconsidered the matter and found that the Tribunal's order was unsustainable. The Court exercised its writ jurisdiction to set aside the award and remit the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication on merits, in the interest of justice. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Tribunal was justified in rejecting the Reference solely on the ground that the petitioner-union was not a recognised union under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, and whether the High Court should reconsider the matter on merits after remand by the Supreme Court.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, set aside the award dated 12.03.2012 of the Industrial Tribunal, Pune, and remitted the matter back to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh disposal on merits in accordance with law. The Civil Applications were disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Article 226
- Article 227
- Industrial Disputes Act 1947 Section 36 proviso
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act 1971
- locus standi of unrecognised union
- remand by Supreme Court
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (04) 72
Writ Petition No.5917 of 2012 with Civil Application (Stamp) No.28798 of 2018 and Civil Application (Stamp) No.29696 of 2018, alongwith Writ Petition No.11412 of 2018
Mr. M.D. Modgi for Petitioner and Applicant in CAW (St.) No.28798/18; Mr. Sudhir Talsania, Senior Counsel a/w Ms. Sneha Jaisingh a/w Mr. Pratik Singhvi I/b. Bharucha & Partners for respondent No.1; Mr. Kiran Bapat i/b. Mr. Avinash H. Fatangare for respondent No.2; Mr. Milan S. Topkar for Applicant (Intervener) in CAW(St.) No.29696/18
Dai-Ichi Karkaria Ltd. and Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an award of the Industrial Tribunal, Pune, rejecting a Reference on the ground that the petitioner-union was not a recognised union.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the award dated 12.03.2012 of the Industrial Tribunal, Pune, rejecting Reference (I.T.) No.19 of 2010, and to have the Reference decided on merits.
Filing Reason
The Industrial Tribunal rejected the Reference on the ground that the petitioner was not a recognised union under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, and thus could not prosecute the reference.
Previous Decisions
The High Court initially dismissed the Writ Petition on 10.07.2013, upholding the Tribunal's order. The Supreme Court, by order dated 18.07.2017, remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Issues
Whether the Industrial Tribunal was correct in rejecting the Reference solely on the ground that the petitioner-union was not a recognised union under the MRTU & PULP Act.
Whether the High Court should reconsider the matter on merits after remand by the Supreme Court.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that there was no recognised union under the first respondent, and therefore the Tribunal ought to have decided the Reference on merits.
The respondents supported the Tribunal's order, contending that only a recognised union could prosecute the reference.
Ratio Decidendi
The absence of a recognised union under the MRTU & PULP Act does not bar the adjudication of an industrial dispute at the instance of an unrecognised union, especially when there is no recognised union. The Tribunal's reliance on the first proviso to Section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act was misplaced, and the matter must be decided on merits.
Judgment Excerpts
By invoking the Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner-original second party challenges the award dated 12.03.2012 of the Industrial Tribunal, Pune rejecting Reference (I.T.) No.19 of 2010.
The reference was rejected by the Industrial Court on the ground that the same was not prosecuted by recognised Union.
Their Lordships vide order dated 18.07.2017 were pleased to remit the matter back to this Court observing thus :-
Procedural History
The Industrial Tribunal, Pune, rejected Reference (I.T.) No.19 of 2010 on 12.03.2012. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.5917 of 2012 in the Bombay High Court, which was dismissed on 10.07.2013. The petitioner appealed to the Supreme Court, which by order dated 18.07.2017 remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The High Court then heard the matter and passed the present judgment on 18.04.2019, allowing the writ petition and remanding the matter to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh disposal on merits.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 36
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971:
