- (1.) THE question that arises for consideration in this Writ Petition is, whether the remedy provided under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are unavailable to the workmen of LIC, consequent to insertion of sub-section (2) (cc), (2a), (2b) and (2c) by way of amendment to section 48 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956.
(2.) THE facts leading to this Writ Petition are as hereunder: one Sri N. Kesar Singh was an employee of the LIC having been appointed as a building supervisor in the year 1962. He came to be dismissed from the service on 21. 5. 1985 for the proved misconduct after holding a domestic enquiry under the provisions of the Life Insurance corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960. The said N. Kesar Singh raised an industrial dispute through the Union. The Central Government referred the matter to the Central government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in reference No. CR No. 72/87 which was registered on 12. 1,1987. After service of notice the said Kesar Singh filed his claim statement on 5. 2. 1987 and LIC filed its counter statement on 20. 5. 1987. The record discloses that the said kesar Singh filed an application I. A. No. I on 21. 5. 1987 for grant of interim relief. Similarly, he filed I. A. No. II on 13. 8. 1987 and I. A. No. III on 4. 4. 1990 for the same relief. No orders were passed on the said applications. On the question of preliminary issue regarding the validity of domestic enquiry, LIC filed an affidavit of the enquiry officer on 15. 7. 1987 and requested the court to take the same as his evidence. The Labour Court rejected the said evidence and held in the absence of any evidence adduced by the LIC regarding the validity of domestic enquiry it has to be held that the domestic enquiry is not valid and legal and posted the case for evidence of the lic to justify the order of dismissal. This order came to be passed on 5. 8. 1987. The said order was challenged by the LIC before this Court in W. R. No. 12453/1987 and in the said Writ petition an interim order was passed staying all further proceedings. It appears that on an application filed for vacating the stay order, this Court directed the LIC to pay the workman a sum of Rs. 3,500 p. m. , as interim relief subject to the result of the Writ Petition and the interim order of stay was continued. Subsequently in yet another application filed by the workman, the aforesaid stay order was modified to the extent that the said stay order would not come in the way of the workman moving the Labour Court for seeking an interim relief. Thereafter, on 9. 6. 1990 the workman died. The same was reported to the Court on 11. 10. 1990, His widow filed an application to come on record which was allowed. Thereafter, she filed an application I. A. No. V for grant of interim relief. The said application was opposed by the LIC. The Tribunal on consideration of the rival contentions rejected the said application by its order dated 17. 7. 1993. The reasons given by the Labour Court was that the domestic enquiry held by the LIC was set aside by the Tribunal as not valid and the deceased Kesar Singh was paid a sum of Rs. 61, 726. 00 as terminal benefits. Under these circumstances, it held that the wife of the deceased workman is not entitled to any interim relief. The said order was not challenged and it became final. W. P. No. 12453/1987 was disposed of on 30. 6. 1995 with an observation that it is open to the employer to tender such evidence to establish the validity of the domestic enquiry. All that is necessary is to issue direction to the Labour Court to dispose of the reference as early as possible after rendering finding on the validity of the domestic enquiry taking note of the contentions of the respective parties. In view of the aforesaid matter when the matter was taken up before the labour Court on the question of validity of domestic enquiry, the LIC filed an application I. A. No. VI contending that the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute in view of the amendment effected to Section 48 of the LIC Act, 1956 and they requested the Labour Court to decide the jurisdictional question first before proceeding with the matter on merits. No objections were filed to the said application. The learned Judge of the Labour Court after hearing the learned Counsel for the LIC has passed the impugned order on 12. 4. 1999 holding that the amendment under Section 48 of the LIC Act do not oust the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act and accordingly dismissed the said application. Further, he proceeded to record a finding that the domestic enquiry held by LIC is not in accordance with the settled principles of law and accordingly he set aside the entire domestic enquiry and he held that the domestic enquiry held is not valid and legal. Further, he took note of the fact that I. A. Nos. II and iii filed by the deceased workman for interim relief had not been disposed of and that the I. A. No. V filed by the wife of the deceased workman had been dismissed on 17. 7. 1993 and the said order would not amount to res judicata and the wife of the deceased applicant was entitled to file application showing changed circumstances and though no such application is filed as he had set aside the domestic enquiry suo motu, he proceeded to grant an interim relief of a sum of Rs. 2,000. 00 per month from 1. 1. 1990 to 31. 12. 1998 and at the rate of Rs. 3,500. 00 per month from 1. 1. 1999 till the disposal of the reference. Aggrieved by the said order, the LIC has preferred this writ Petition.
(3.) SRI V. C. Bhrahmarayappa, the learned Counsel appearing for the LIC, assailing the impugned order passed by the Labour Court contended that the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 is a self contained Act and Section 48 of the said Act provides for provisions to make regulations and also to make rules. Section 49 of the Act empowers the Corporation to make Regulations in respect of matters enumerated in sub-section (2) (a) to (m ). In exercise of that power conferred on it the Corporation has made the Regulations called the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 which provides for recruitment and other conditions of service including holding of domestic enquiry and imposition of penalties. As a consequence of the amendment effected to Section 48 of the Act inserting sub-section (2) (oo), (2a), (2b) and (2c)the regulations framed by the Corporation have now become deemed rules under Section 48 of the said Act. The said provisions has the effect of excluding the provisions of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 to the disputes between the workmen and the Corporation. In fact the supreme Court in the case of A. V. NACHANE AND ORS. V. UNION OF INIDA AND ORS. , AIR1982 SC 1126 , (1982 )I LLJ110 SC , (1982 )1 SCC205 , [1982 ]2 scr246 and in the case of M. VENUGOPAL V. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA and ORS. , AIR1994 SC 1343 , [1994 (68 )FLR443 ], JT1994 (1 )SC 281 , (1994 )I LLJ597 SC , 1994 (0 )MPLJ415 , 1994 (1 )SCALE264 , (1994 )2 SCC323 , [1994 ]1 SCR433 , 1994 (3 )SLJ206 (SC ), 1994 (2 )UJ73 (SC ), (1994 )1 UPLBEC413 dealing with the effect of amendment of Section 48 of the Act has held that the amended provision excludes the application of the Industrial Disputes Act and, therefore, he contends this reference made and entertained under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act is not maintainable and the labour Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the reference, as such the impugned order passed in such an invalid reference is liable to be quashed. Secondly, he contended that the Labour Court committed a serious error in passing an order for payment of interim maintenance when there was no such request made or pending consideration and without hearing the petitioner before passing such order and further it has no jurisdiction to pass suo motu order as it did and, therefore, the order passed directing payment of interim maintenance is one without jurisdiction, passed in violation of principles of natural justice and, is therefore liable to be quashed.;