KANORIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED BAGALKOT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the validity of Annexure-K order passed by the Government. The facts in this case are as follows:

(2.) The petitioner is a Cement Factory, employing more than 450 workers. There are two units. On certain alleged misconduct committed by the 4th respondent, he was proceeded against, which resulted in the workers launching a strike. The dispute regarding the disciplinary action taken against the 4th respondent is pending adjudication before the Labour Court, evidenced by Annexure-J. At this stage, the Government has passed Annexure-K order calling upon the Management to pay 75 per cent of the wages to the workers. This order has been issued in exercise of the power under Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The challenge against the said order is essentially on the allegation that this order having been passed without hearing the petitioner. The Management contends that before the issuance of Annexure-K order, the petitioner ought to have been heard and only after hearing it, an order could have been passed. According to the Management, the order has civil consequence and, therefore, whenever an order having civil consequence is to be passed, it is essential that the person affected by the said order should be heard. To sustain the challenge, the petitioner relies on certain authorities of the Supreme Court as also of this Court.

(3.) The learned High Court Government Advocate has appeared tc defend the Annexure-K order. According to the learned Government Advocate who appeared, it is conceded that this order was passed without hearing the Management. But according to him, as the order has no civil consequences it is not necessary. According to him, it is only a consequential order issued on the basis of the reference of a dispute to the Labour Court. He submits that when the conciliation failed, the Management had notice as to what has to follow. It should be deemed to have been put to notice of the fact that there is likelihood of a reference being made to the Labour Court and that the Government is armed with the power under Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act and is entitled to issue appropriate order. Therefore, according to him, no notice need be given to the petitioner-Management before any order is issued under Section 10-B.