S.S.Dhavan, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by 29 firms which are carrying on the business of manufacture of glassware in Firozabad district, Agra. Their main business is to manufacture bangles made of glass. The petition is directed against the legality of an order of the Labour Commissioner of Uttar Pradesh dated 13 December 1957 referring a dispute between the firms and their workmen to the industrial tribunal, Allahabad, for adjudication. The order of reference runs thus: Whereas I am of opinion that an industrial dispute in respect of the matter hereinafter specified exists between the employers and the workmen of the concerns as mentioned in. the schedule; Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4K of the industrial Disputes Act, 1917 (Uttar Pradesh Act XXVIII of 1947), delegated to me under notification No. 2723 (ST)/XXXVI-A/50 (ST)/1957, dated 20 May 1957, I hereby rarer the said dispute to the industrial tribunal (general) at Allahabad, constituted by G.O. No. U-179 (ST)(i)/XXXVI-A dated 30 April 1957, for adjudication on the following issues: Matter of dispute Should the employers mentioned in the schedule be required to revise the wages of their workmen of various categories mentioned in the annexure; if so, with what details? J. Pkasad, Dy. Labour Commissioner (Industrial Relations), U. P.
(2.) Before the tribunal could hear the dispute, the petitioners came to this Court and challenged the legality of the reference itself. Two points have been urged before me. First, is contended that no reference could have been made with regard to firms which had closed down their factories before the alleged dispute between the employers and their workmen arose. Secondly, a single reference covering the disputes in several factories is incompetent.
(3.) The petitioners pray for a writ of prohibition directing the Industrial tribunal not to proceed with the bearing of the dispute. The petition is opposed by the State and a counter affidavit has been filed, it is denied that any of the firms closed down their factories before the dispute arose, and alternatively, it is submitted that even if there was a closure of some factories, this is a matter which should be taken up before the industrial tribunal itself. The State further contends that a single reference covering an identical dispute in several factories is quite valid.;