Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1989 (4) TMI 342

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellants challenging the order of the State of Bihar refusing to make a reference of the disputes raised by the appellants to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the Act . 3. The appellant Sangh represents about 900 convoy drivers. By a letter of demand dated October 16, 1986 addressed to the General Manager of the Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd., Jamshedpur (for short TELCO ), the Sangh demanded that permanent status should be given by the management to all the convoy drivers, and that they should also be given all the facilities as are available to the permanent employees of TELCO on the dates of their appointment. The said demand proceeds on the basis that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and expressed the hope that the appropriate Government would consider the matter in a proper perspective in the light of the documents and the materials that would be placed by the Sangh in accordance with law. The writ petition was dismissed subject, however, to the observation and direction mentioned above. 5. Pursuant to the liberty granted by the High Court, the Sangh made a representation to the Government for a reference of the dispute .under Section 10(1) of the Act. The Deputy Labour Commissioner, Jamshedpur, by his letter dated November 6, 1986 gave the same reply and refused to make a reference. 6. Again, the appellant-Sangh moved a writ petition before the High Court and, as stated already, the High Court summarily dismissed the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n of the hearing, we took the view that the Government should be given one more chance to consider the question of making a reference and, accordingly, we by our order dated March 30, 1989 directed the Government to reconsider the question of referring the dispute raised by the convey drivers to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Act, keeping the appeal pending before us. 10. The learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Government, has produced before us an order dated April 13, 1989 of the Government whereby the Government has, upon a reconsideration of the matter, refused to make a reference under Section 10(1) of the Act. In refusing to make a reference, the Government has adjudicated the dispute on its merits. 11. It is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inition as contained in Section 2(k) of the Act. 13. Attractive though the contention is, we regret, we are unable to accept the same. It is now well settled that, while exercising power under Section 10(1) of the Act, the function of the appropriate Government is an administrative function and not a judicial or quasi judicial function, and that in performing this administrative function the Government cannot delve into the merits of the dispute and take upon itself the determination of the lis, which would certainly be in excess of the power conferred on it by Section 10 of the Act. See Ram Avtar Sharma v. State of Haryana (1985) IILLJ 187 SC; M.P. Irrigation Karamchari Sangh v. State of M.P. (1985) ILLJ 519 SC; Shambu Nath Goyal v. Bank o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... we had given one more chance to the Government to reconsider the matter and the Government after reconsideration has come to the same conclusion that the convoy drivers are not workmen of TELCO thereby adjudicating the dispute itself. After having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and having given our best consideration in the matter, we are of the view that the dispute should be adjudicated by the Industrial Tribunal and, as the Government has persistently declined to make a reference, under Section 10(1) of the Act, we think we should direct the Government to make such a reference. In several instances this Court had to direct the Government to make a reference under Section 10(1) when the Government had declined to make .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates