Agarwala, J. - (1.) This is a special appeal against th judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court arising out of a writ petition in an industrial dispute matter. The appellant is the union of workmen employed by the Punjab Sugar Mills Ltd,, Ghughli, in the district of Gorakhpur. Certain workers which were in the employ of the Mills were dismissed by it whereupon they raised a dispute. There was a settlement according to which the retrenched employees were to be re-employed either by the Mills or by a co-operative society of cane growers called the Cane Development Union. In spite of this agreement the dispute did not come to an end as about 130 employees still remained unemployed. The President of the appellant Union, therefore, filed an application before the Regional Conciliation Board on 20-4-1953. for settling the industrial dispute about the rein-statement of 130 discharged workers. In this application the request was that the Board might decide the question of the reinstatement of those 130 workmen to their old jobs with full wages for the period of their unemployment and due Consideration for other amenities. The Board was subsequently constituted but as no conciliation could be effected between the parties the Board submitted a report to the Government. The Government thereupon issued the following Notification on 30-7-1953, under the powers conferred upon it by Sections 3, 4 and 8, U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, and in pursuance of the provisions of clause 10 of the G. O. No. 615, dated 15-3-1951: "Whereas an industrial dispute in respect of the matter hereinafter specified exists between the concern known as M/S The Punjab Sugar Mills Go. Ltd., Ghughli District Gorakhpur and its work-men (C. S. No. 142 of 1953) and whereas in the opinion of the Governor it is necessary so to do for the maintenance of public order and for maintaining employment; Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 3, 4 and 8 of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (U. P. Act No. 28 of 1947) and in pursuance of the provisions of clause 10 of G. O. No. 615 (LL)/XVIII-7(LL)/51 dated 15-3-1951, the Governor is pleased to refer the said dispute to Sri J. N. Khanna Regional Conciliation Officer, Gorakhpur, who shall adjudicate on the following issue in accordance with the provisions of the aforesaid G. O. No. 815 (LL)/XVIII-7(LL) 1951, dated 15-3-1951. Matter of dispute. Whether the employers should be required to give any retrenchment relief or compensation to the workmen as peri annexure? If so, with what details?" To this was annexed a list of 130 retrenched workers.
(2.) Clause 10 of G. O. no. 615 dated 15-3-1951, runs as follows: "Where the State Government is of opinion that any industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, it may at any time either of its own motion, or after considering the report of the Conciliation Board made under sub-clause (3) of clause 6 or on an application made to it, by order in writing, refer any dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, or if the State Government considering the nature of the dispute or the convenience of the parties so decides, to any other person specified in that behalf for adjudication." The complaint of the appellant was that the Government referred merely the dispute about the "retrenched relief or compensation" and not the dispute about the re-employment of the retrenched workers and payment to them of their salary for the period for which they had remained unemployed. The appellant therefore filed a writ petition in this Court praying that a writ, direction or order in the nature or mandamus be issued to the State Government to refer the alleged actual dispute between the parties, that is, the reinstatement of the workers to the adjudicator.
(3.) The argument of learned counsel for the appellant was that the word 'may' in clause 10 of the Government Order of March 15, 1951, meant 'shall' and that therefore the Government was bound to refer all the disputes that existed and not one only of such disputes. The learned single Judge rejected the petition on the ground that tinder Clause 10 of the G. O. dated the 15th March, 1951, referred to the above the Government was not bound to refer for adjudication every dispute which existed but was entitled to refer only such dispute or disputed as it considered necessary to be referred.;