- (1.) THE Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company, Limited, Kanpur, filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for the issue of a writ in the nature of 'prohibition' against opposite party 1, the State Industrial Tribunal, U. P. , prohibiting it from proceeding further with the industrial dispute case No. 78 of 1953 pending before that Tribunal, a writ in the nature of 'certiorari' quashing the proceedings in that industrial dispute case and a writ in the nature of 'mandamus' against the State of Uttar Pradesh opposite, party 5, directing it to withdraw its notification No. 2078 (LC)XVIII-LA-T-l7673 (KR)/53 dated 25-6-1953, by which an industrial dispute between the petitioner company and opposite party 6, the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union, kanpur, was referred for adjudication by the State of Uttar Pradesh to the State Industrial tribunal, U. P.
(2.) THE case as put forward by the petitioner company, as that, on 7-11-1951, an illegal strike was commenced in the mills operated by the petitioner company. Thereupon the company warned the participants in the strike that it was illegal and also informed them of the consequences that would follow this illegal strike. The strikers paid no heed to this warning nor to the advice given to them by the labour Inspector and the Labour Conciliation Officer and continued their strike up to 23-11-1951. During this strike, acts of violence and unruly behaviour were committed. "work was resumed on the advice of the Labour Commissioner and then charge sheets were submitted against 55 workmen, who had taken part in the strike, for various acts of misconduct in connection with the strike. After written explanations had been submitted and an enquiry had been made, 30 workmen, who were adjudged guilty of various types of serious misconduct, were dismissed under the standing orders. The remaining 25 workmen were allowed to rejoin their duties after punishment under the standing orders. Opposite party 6, the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union, Kanpur, then made a representation on behalf of those 30 dismissed workmen to the Conciliation Officer, Kanpur, stating that an industrial dispute had arisen as a result of the dismissal of those 30, workmen and asking for the constitution of a Conciliation Board. The Conciliation Board was constituted and it commenced its proceedings on 10-1-1952. No settlement having been arrived at, the Conciliation Board submitted its report to the State Government. The Government of Uttar Pradesh sent for the representatives of the petitioner company and discussed the entire position with them. Thereafter in May 1952, the Government communicated its decision in writing, through the Labour Commissioner's office, to opposite party 6, intimating that the Government considered it inexpedient to refer the dispute for adjudication as no case had been made out. This decision was also communicated to the representatives of the petitioner company. Subsequently, on 7-2-1953, opposite party 6 again applied to the Conciliation Officer for the constitution of a Conciliation Board for settlement of the same dispute. The proceedings for conciliation were commenced afresh and were continued despite the protest of the petitioner company that the repetition of the conciliation proceedings was not permissible when the matter had been finally disposed of about a year earlier. Subsequently, the State Government issued a notification dated 25-6-1953, mentioned above and referred the industrial dispute for adjudication to the State Industrial Tribunal and, on 30-6-1953, the petitioner company received a notice from the State Industrial Tribunal, U. P. that 10-7-1953 had been fixed in the case. Subsequently the case was adjourned to 15-7-1953. On 13-7-1953, this petition was presented in this Court and, on 14-7-1953, an interim order was passed, prohibiting the State Industrial Tribunal U. P. , from proceeding with case No. 78 of 1953 pending before it until further orders of this Court.
(3.) THE petition has been contested by all the opposite parties hut no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 5. A counter-affidavit was filed only on behalf of opposite party 6, the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union, Kanpur, and, in reply to that counter-affidavit, a rejoinder affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioner company. Further, two amendment applications were presented by the petitioner company for adding new grounds, particularly, in view of subsequent general orders issued by the State Government in its notifications No. U-464 (LL)/xxxvi-B-257 (LL)-1954, dated 14-7-1954, and No. U. 686 (LL)/xxxvi (B)-257 (LL)-1954 dated 8-9-1954. These amendment applications were allowed and the grounds added in them have, therefore, also to be considered.;