D.S. Sinha, J. - (1.) This Full Bench, is in substance, called upon to adjudicate upon the question as to whether a writ petition, under Article 26 of the Constitution of India, should or should not be entertained by the High Court where the cause of action for the petition emanates from the retrenchment of a workman in violation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, generally, and, on the facts and circumstances of this case specifically, notwithstanding the fact that an alternative remedy under the aforesaid Acts may be available to the petitioner.
(2.) Sections 25-F and 6-N ordain that no workman employed in any industry, who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer, shall be retrenched by that employer until the conditions specified therein are fulfilled. The conditions contemplated by the sections are, generally, giving of one month's notice in writing disclosing the reasons for retrenchment or payment of wages in lieu of the period of notice, payment of specified compensation to the workman at the time of retrenchment and the service of notice upon the appropriate Government or specified authority in the prescribed manner.
(3.) Undoubtedly, if any workman is retrenched in violation of the conditions stipulated by Section 25-F or 6-N, such retrenchment would be illegal and every dispute arising therefrom would be an 'industrial dispute' as envisaged by sub-section (k) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 inasmuch as such dispute or difference between an employer and workman arising out of or in relation to retrenchment would necessarily be connected with the employment or the terms relating thereto. It may be noticed that expression 'an industrial dispute' within its sweep includes discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or otherwise termination of service of an individual workman also.;