- (1.) The applicant, the Laxmi Devi Sugar Mills, Ltd., situated at Chhitauni in district Deoria, has made two applications under Article 226 of the Constitution. In these "writ petitions, the prayer is that the order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India be quashed, and suitable ordors be passed in the case.
(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the applicant mills is a limited liability company carrying on the manufacture of sugar in village Chhitauni, and there are a number of workmen working in the mills. On 27 March 1952, there was some dispute between 76 workmen, belonging to the engineering department, and the management. At about 10-30 a m. the management passed an order suspending the workmen. It was alleged on behalf of the applicant that at about 1 p.m. these workers made a forcible entry into the factory, and the police had to be called. On 2 June 1952 charge-sheets were issued to all the 76 workmen with a copy to the Chini Mill Mazdoor Sangh (it was an association of the workers at Chhitauni). An enquiry was fixed for 6 June 1952 and a magistrate was called to be present at the enquiry but the workmen did not turn up. A written statement submitted by the workmen was said to have been considered but the management was not satisfied with the explanation and found the workers guilty of misconduct.
(3.) At this time an appeal was pending before the Labour Appellate Tribunal in connection with another dispute between the management and some workmen. The management applied under Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act of 1950 for permission to dismiss the 76 workmen. This application was moved on 11 June 1952. Two days before the mills moved the application under Section 22, another application had been moved under Section 23 of the same Act, by the Chini Mill Mazdoor Sangh on behalf of 76 suspended workmen. Both these applications were heard by the Labour Appellate Tribunal at Allahabad, and were disposed of by their order, dated 19 August 1952. (See 1952 II L.L.J. 801.) The Tribunal decided both the applications against the mills. The application filed by the mills under Section 22 was dismissed mainly on the ground that the mills had omitted to issue a charge-sheet to the workmen within four days of the date of occurrence. As stated above, the date of the occurrence was 27 May 1952 and the charge-sheet was submitted on 2 June 1952 and not on 31 May 1952. It was held that the workmen could be suspended only for four days pending enquiry. But if it was desired to extend the period of suspension, then the management had to give sufficient reasons.;