Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, United White Metal Ltd., a company engaged in manufacturing steel wire ropes, purchased a factory undertaking from M/s. OTIS Elevators on 29.12.2003, along with 235 workers on an 'as is where is' basis. Due to competitiveness, globalisation, and advanced technology, the petitioner could not retain all workers and applied under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking permission to retrench 116 workmen. On 17.9.2004, the Specified Authority (Additional Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai) granted permission, and the petitioner retrenched the workers complying with legal provisions. On 22.9.2004 and 23.9.2004, the respondent Bhartiya Kamgar Sena and another union applied for review of the order. On 11.10.2004, the Specified Authority refused to review but referred the matter to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. On 20.10.2004, the appropriate Government sent the reference to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 25-N. On 2.12.2004, the petitioner filed an application for interim relief. The Industrial Tribunal passed an order on 8.12.2005 granting interim relief, which the petitioner challenged in the present writ petition. The legal issue was whether the Industrial Tribunal had the power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal had no such power, while the respondent contended that the power was incidental. The court held that the Tribunal's power to grant interim relief is incidental to its adjudicatory function and dismissed the petition, upholding the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Retrenchment - Interim Relief - Section 25-N, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Industrial Tribunal has the power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N, as such power is incidental to its adjudicatory function. The court held that the Tribunal's order granting interim relief was within its jurisdiction and not without authority. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Tribunal has the power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, pending final adjudication.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Tribunal's order granting interim relief.
Law Points
- Interim relief
- Industrial Tribunal
- Section 25-N
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Incidental power
- Retrenchment
- Reference
Case Details
2006 LawText (BOM) (04) 85
WRIT PETITION NO.838 OF 2006
Mr. K.K. Singhvi a/w Mr. Avinash Jalisatgi for the petitioners, Mr. Shailesh More a/w Ms. Bina Dholakia for the respondents
Bhartiya Kamgar Sena and Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an order of the Industrial Tribunal granting interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the Industrial Tribunal's order dated 8.12.2005 granting interim relief.
Filing Reason
The petitioner challenged the Tribunal's order on the ground that the Tribunal had no power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N.
Previous Decisions
The Specified Authority granted permission to retrench 116 workers on 17.9.2004; review application was refused on 11.10.2004 but matter referred to Industrial Tribunal; Tribunal passed interim relief order on 8.12.2005.
Issues
Whether the Industrial Tribunal has the power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Industrial Tribunal has no power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N.
Respondent contended that the Tribunal has incidental power to grant interim relief.
Ratio Decidendi
The Industrial Tribunal has the power to grant interim relief in a reference under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as such power is incidental to its adjudicatory function.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petition is challenging the order dt.8.12.05 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No.46 of 204.
The petitioners is a company engaged in the manufacturing of steel wire ropes.
On 29.12.03, the petitioners purchased the factory undertaking of M/s. OTIS Elevators, comprising of 235 workers, on 'as is where is basis'.
On 17.9.04, the Specified Authority (i.e. the Additional Commissioner of Labour, Mumbai) passed an order granting the permission to retrench 116 workers.
On 11.10.04 the Specified Authority passed an order refusing to review the earlier order but referred it to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication.
Procedural History
The petitioner applied under Section 25-N for retrenchment permission; Specified Authority granted permission on 17.9.2004; unions applied for review on 22.9.2004 and 23.9.2004; Specified Authority refused review on 11.10.2004 but referred to Industrial Tribunal; Government sent reference on 20.10.2004; petitioner filed interim relief application on 2.12.2004; Tribunal granted interim relief on 8.12.2005; petitioner filed writ petition on 3.4.2006.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 25-N
