2010 (8) TMI 1182 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of the "appropriate government" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
2. Maintainability of applications under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU and PULP Act).
3. Control and management of Tata Memorial Centre (TMC).
4. Vesting of property and assets of TMC.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Determination of the "Appropriate Government" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947:
The primary issue was whether the Central Government or the State Government is the "appropriate government" for Tata Memorial Centre (TMC) under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court examined the statutory framework and relevant case law, including the Constitution Bench judgment in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. National Union Waterfront Workers (2001) 7 SCC 1. It was determined that the Central Government would be the "appropriate government" only if the industry is carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government. The court concluded that TMC does not function under the authority of the Central Government, as its administration and management are vested in its Governing Council, making the State Government the "appropriate government."

2. Maintainability of Applications under the MRTU and PULP Act:
The applications filed under Sections 13 and 14 of the MRTU and PULP Act were challenged on the grounds that the Central Government, not the State Government, was the "appropriate government" for TMC. The court held that since the State Government is the "appropriate government" for TMC under the Industrial Disputes Act, the applications under the MRTU and PULP Act were maintainable. The Industrial Court's decision to dismiss the applications on merits was upheld.

3. Control and Management of Tata Memorial Centre (TMC):
The court analyzed whether TMC functions independently or under the control of the Central Government. It was noted that TMC was established by Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and later managed by a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The administration and management of TMC are vested in its Governing Council, which operates independently. The court found no evidence of Central Government interference in TMC's day-to-day activities, confirming its independent functioning.

4. Vesting of Property and Assets of TMC:
The court examined the vesting of TMC's property and assets. Initially, the Tata Memorial Hospital was set up by Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and later dedicated to the nation, with the Central Government taking over control and management. However, the 1966 agreement between the Central Government and the Trust led to the formation of TMC as a society, with future acquisitions vested in the Governing Council. The court held that the property and assets of TMC are deemed to be vested in its Governing Council, not the Central Government.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the State Government is the "appropriate government" for TMC under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and consequently under the MRTU and PULP Act. The applications filed under the MRTU and PULP Act were maintainable, and the Industrial Court's decision to dismiss them on merits was upheld. The Division Bench's judgment was set aside, and the order of the Industrial Court, as confirmed by the Single Judge, was restored. The appeal was allowed, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.