Venkatarama Ayyar, J. - (1.) The Central Provinces Transport Services Ltd. Nagpur, was, at the material dates, a public limited Company, and the respondent was employed as a mechanic therein. In June 1950, goods belonging to the company were stolen and suspension fell on the respondent. There was an enquiry into the matter, and that resulted in his dismissal on 28-6-1950, on the ground of gross negligence and p73 misconduct. He was then prosecuted on a charge of theft, but that ended in his acquittal on 3-3-1952. Thereafter, he applied to the company to be reinstated, and failing to get redress filed on 1-10-1952, an application before the Labour Commissioner under S. 16 (2), of the C. P. and Berar Industrial Disputes Act No. 23 of 1947, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for reinstatement and compensation. The company resisted the claim on the ground, inter alia, that as the applicant had been dismissed on 28-6-1950, he was not an employee on the date of the application, that accordingly there was no "Industrial dispute touching the dismissal of an employee" as required by S. 16, sub-ss. (1) and (2) of the Act, and that, in consequence, the proceedings under that section were incompetent. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, before whom the matter came up for hearing, agreed with this contention, and dismissed the application. The respondent preferred a revision against this order to the Provincial Industrial Court under S. 16 (5) of the Act, and by its order dated 5-2-1954, that court held that a dismissed employee was an employee as defined in S. 2 (10) of the Act, that a dispute by such an employee was an industrial dispute within S. 2 (12) of the Act, and that the application under S. 16 (2) of the Act was therefore maintainable. In the result, the order of dismissal was set aside and the matter remanded for enquiry on the merits. Against that order, the Company appealed to the Labour Appellate Tribunal, which by its order dated 10-10-1954, affirmed the decision of the Provincial Industrial Court, and dismissed the appeal. The Company has preferred the present appeal against this order under Art. 136. Pending the appeal to this Court, the Company went into liquidation and has been taken over by the State of Madhya Pradesh, and is now being run under the name of Central Provinces Transport Services (under Government ownership) Nagpur. On the application of the respondent, the record has been suitably amended.
(2.) The point for decision in this appeal is whether an application for reinstatement and compensation by a dismissed employee is maintainable under S. 16 of the Act. That Section, so far as is material to the present question, runs as follows: "(1) Where the State Government by notification so directs, the Labour Commissioner shall have power to decide an industrial dispute touching the dismissal, discharge, removal or suspension of an employee working in any industry in general or in any local area as may be specified in the notification. (2) Any employee working in an industry to which the notification under sub-section (1) applied, may within six months from the date of such dismissal, discharge, removal or suspension apply to the Labour Commissioner for reinstatement and payment of compensation for loss of wages." The argument of Mr. Umrigar for the appellant is that it is a condition prerequisite to the entertainment of an application for reinstatement under this section that there should be an industrial dispute touching the dismissal of an employee, that there was none such in this case, because the respondent was not an employee on the date of the application, having been dismissed long prior thereto and further because his dispute was an individual and not an industrial dispute.
(3.) It will be convenient at this stage to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act, as they stood on the material dates. Section 2 (10) defines an employee as follows: " 'employee' means any person employed by an employer to do any skilled, unskilled, manual or clerical work for contract p73 or hire or reward in any industry and includes an employee discharged on account of any dispute relating to a change in respect of which a notice is given under S. 31 or 32, whether before or after the discharge." Section 2 (12) defines "Industrial Dispute" as meaning "any dispute or difference connected with an industrial matter arising between employer and employee or between employers or employees." Under S. 2 (13), "Industrial matter" means "any matter relating to work, pay, wages, reward, hours, privileges, rights or duties of employees or employers or the mode, terms, conditions of employment or refusal to employ and includes questions pertaining to (a) the relationship between the employer and employee or to the dismissal or non-employment of any person .......";