AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.D. Dinakaran, J.—Heard.
The petitioners, who were temporary employees in the first respondent/management, raised an industrial dispute against the first respondent,
with regard to their non-employment from December 15, 1997. The fifth respondent, by proceedings even, dated August 5, 1998, u/s 12(4) of the
Industrial Disputes Act (for brevity the Act) of course after calling for the remark of the management and considering their comments submitted a
failure report and the same was forwarded to the fourth respondent, who by independent proceedings even, dated December 17, 1999, refused to
refer the matter for adjudication holding that:
(i) the petitioners have been reportedly retrenched from service as the management had no work to offer them;
(ii) there was no violation of the provisions of the Act; and
(iii) the management was willing to give compensation.
Hence the petitioners have preferred these writ petitions for issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the Government to refer the dispute relating to
their non-employment with effect from December 15, 1997 to the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai for adjudication.
It is no doubt true that before passing a failure report u/s 12(4) of the Act, the fifth respondent sought for comments of the first respondent
management and also considered the same. But, however, the fourth respondent acting on the basis of the failure report submitted by the fifth
respondent came to the conclusion that:
(i) the petitioners have been reportedly retrenched from service as the management had no work to offer them;
(ii) there was no violation of the provisions of the Act; and
(iii) the management was willing to give compensation, merely on the ground that the first respondent/management was willing to give
compensation.
It is trite law that it is not open to refuse to refer the matter for adjudication by eschewing the powers of the authorities conferred under the Act
for such adjudication, vide Cheran Transport Employees'' Union Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu and Another, .
A cursory reading of the proceedings even, dated February 17, 1999, makes it clear that the said proceedings were passed by the fourth
respondent without going into the merits of the dispute, which in my considered opinion, is impermissible in law. Therefore, satisfied that the refusal
to refer the dispute for adjudication by the Government is per se illegal, I hereby direct the fourth respondent to refer the matter for adjudication
within sixty days from the date of receipt of copy of this order in order to avoid any further delay in rendering justice.
These writ petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs.