- (1.) Petitioner company is registered under the Indian Companies Act, with its Factory at Iradatgal, Rewa Road, Allahabad, established in 1982, by this writ petition, it has prayed for a direction in the nature of certiorari quashing notices dated 20.9.1996 and 8.10.1996, issued by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad under Section 25-R of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , and for a direction prohibiting the respondents not to prosecute petitioner in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 21.9.1996; and also from issuing recovery certificates under U.P. Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of Wages) Act, 1978 (in short, U.P. Act of 1978).
(2.) Petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of sheet glass. It is alleged that due to advance in manufacturing technology its machines became out dated. Petitioners product lost its business in the competitive market, resulting into accumulated stocks and losses running into crores of rupees. The Company decided to close down its unit with effect from 12.9.1996, and issued a closure notice to all concerned authorities.
(3.) The Deputy Labour Commissioner by his notice dated 20.9.1996 called upon petitioner to show cause as to why prosecution may not be launched against it under Section 25-R of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short Central Act), as the company has not complied with the provisions of Section 25-O of the Act. By another notice dated 8.10.1996, the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad, asked petitioner to show cause as to why recovery certificate for realisation of an amount of Rs. 3,37,630/- towards the workmen's wages be not issued under Section 3 of the U.P. Act, 1978, by a judgment and order dated 25.5.2001 the impugned notices were quashed. This Court held that Section 25-0 of the Central Act, as it stood prior to its amendment, by U.P. Act No. 46 of 1982 was declared unconstitutional and invalid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Excel Ware v. Union of India, 1979 AIR(SC) 25, Section 6-W of the U.P. Act, which is pari materia with Section 25-O of the Central Act, came for consideration in Jay Shree Tea Limited v. Industrial Tribunal Allahabad, 1990 60 FLR 608 Section 6-W of U.P. Act and amended 25-0, of the Central Act, were declared as unconstitutional, and thus no action could be taken nor any notice could be issued for violation of the said provisions providing for procedure to close down an undertaking.;