1989 (4) TMI 342 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Refusal to make a reference of disputes to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
2. Jurisdiction of the Government in deciding industrial disputes.
3. Role of appropriate Government in adjudicating disputes under Section 10(1) of the Act.

Analysis:
The judgment involves the appeal by Telco Convoy Drivers Mazdoor Sangh against the Patna High Court's dismissal of their writ petition challenging the State of Bihar's refusal to refer their disputes to the Industrial Tribunal. The dispute revolved around whether the convoy drivers were workmen or employees of TELCO, determining the existence of an industrial dispute. Initially, the Deputy Labour Commissioner and the Government refused to make a reference, leading to the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition. The Supreme Court directed the Government to reconsider the matter, emphasizing that the Government's role is administrative and not judicial or quasi-judicial. The Court highlighted that the Government cannot decide the dispute's merits but should refer it to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The judgment cited precedents to establish that the Government's refusal to make a reference was not justified, emphasizing the need for the Tribunal to adjudicate valid disputes.

The Court rejected the argument that the Government could decide the existence of an industrial dispute based on whether the disputants were workmen. It emphasized that the Government's function under Section 10(1) is administrative and should not involve delving into the dispute's merits. The judgment underscored that the Government's attempt to decline references without valid reasons would undermine the Act's provisions. The Court directed the State of Bihar to refer the dispute to an appropriate Industrial Tribunal within a specified timeframe, highlighting previous instances where the Court intervened to ensure references were made when the Government declined. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court's judgment and the impugned orders, with no order as to costs.

In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the appropriate Government's role in adjudicating industrial disputes under the Industrial Disputes Act, emphasizing the administrative nature of its function and the necessity to refer disputes to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The Court's decision underscores the importance of ensuring valid disputes are adjudicated through the proper legal channels, maintaining the Act's integrity and purpose.