Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Textile Kamgar Sanghatana (a registered trade union) and a Joint Committee for agreement comprising eleven employees, along with another employee, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Industrial Court, Nagpur, dated 19.07.2013. The Industrial Court had rejected their applications (Exhs. 14, 17, and 20) in Reference (BIR) No. 5 of 2012, by which they sought to be impleaded and to participate in the proceedings. The background of the case is that the respondent no.2, M/s Spentex Industries Ltd., is an industry whose employees had formed the petitioner trade union. The service conditions were governed by agreements between the industry and elected representatives. An earlier agreement dated 07.07.2009 expired on 31.10.2011. Thereafter, four elected representatives (respondents 3A to 3D) gave a fresh charter of demands under Section 42(2) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. Since no agreement was reached, a notice in Form N under Section 45 was given on 01.01.2012, and conciliation proceedings began. The Joint Committee sought to participate but was objected to by the industry and the elected representatives, and the Conciliation Officer did not permit their participation. The conciliation failed, and the State Government referred the dispute to the Industrial Court under Section 73 of the Act. The petitioners then filed applications before the Industrial Court to be heard, which were rejected. The High Court, after hearing counsel for all parties, held that the right to be heard is a fundamental principle of natural justice. The Act does not exclude other interested persons from participating in conciliation or adjudication. The Conciliation Officer's refusal to allow the Joint Committee to participate was improper. The Industrial Court erred in rejecting the applications for impleadment. The High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Industrial Court to permit the petitioners to participate in the reference proceedings. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Right to be Heard - Unrecognized Union - Sections 42(2), 45, 73 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 - The petitioners, a trade union and a joint committee of employees, sought to participate in conciliation proceedings and the subsequent reference before the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court rejected their applications for impleadment and participation. The High Court held that the right to be heard is a facet of natural justice and that the Act does not bar participation of other interested persons. The Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Industrial Court to permit the petitioners to participate in the proceedings. (Paras 2-10) B) Industrial Law - Conciliation Proceedings - Participation of Third Parties - Section 45 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 - The Conciliation Officer had refused to allow the Joint Committee to participate in conciliation. The High Court held that the Conciliation Officer ought to have allowed participation as the Act does not restrict participation only to elected representatives. The failure to do so vitiated the conciliation process. (Paras 3-8) C) Industrial Law - Reference to Industrial Court - Impleadment of Interested Parties - Section 73 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 - The Industrial Court rejected applications for impleadment filed by the petitioners. The High Court held that the Industrial Court has power to allow impleadment of persons who have a direct interest in the dispute, and that the petitioners, being employees and a trade union, had such interest. The order rejecting the applications was set aside. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, who are not the elected representatives under Section 42(2) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, have a right to be heard in the conciliation proceedings and in the reference before the Industrial Court.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 19.07.2013 passed by the Industrial Court, and directed the Industrial Court to permit the petitioners to participate in the proceedings in Reference (BIR) No. 5 of 2012. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Right of unrecognized union to participate in conciliation proceedings
- Interpretation of Section 42(2) and Section 73 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act
- 1946
- Principles of natural justice in industrial adjudication
