Mootham, C.J. - (1.) These are two appeals from a judgment of Mr. Justice Chaturvedi dated the 2nd November, 1954, dismissing two writ petitions filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) The circumstances in which the petitions were filed can be stated, shortly. The petitioner is a limited Company and carries on the business of cotton spinning and weaving in Kanpur. In April and May 1930 large quantities of cloth were stolen from the petitioner's warehouse and on 13th June, 1950, the Employers' Association of Northern India, at the instance of the petitioner, moved the Regional Conciliation Board to enquire into an industrial dispute which it was contended had arisen between the petitioner and its workmen and to declare that the former would be justified in terminating the services of 27 members of its Watch and Ward personnel. The Regional Conciliation Board conducted an enquiry, and by an award dated the 2nd September, 1950, it held that the petitioner was entitled to terminate the services of the 27 members of its Watch and Ward personnel on payment to them of compensation. The Employers' Association of Northern India preferred an appeal on behalf of the petitioner against this award and cross appeal was also filed by the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union, Kanpur, on behalf of the 27 employees.
(3.) On the 24th January, 1951, the Industrial Court allowed the appeal filed by the employers' Association and dismissed that filed by the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union; and shortly thereafter the petitioner discharged the 27 employees from its service. These former employees then filed an appeal from the order of the Industrial Court before the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India which on the 15th January, 1952, without going into the merits of the case, allowed the appeal on the ground that the Employers' Association of Northern India was entitled to move the Conciliation Board on behalf of the petitioner. It then appears that overtures were made by the Suti Mill Mazdoor Union to the petitioner on behalf of the 27 discharged employees and negotiations, presumably in connection with their proposed re-engagement, continued till the end of May 1952. The negotiations did not result in the reengagement of the 27 former employees and on the following 23rd July the State Government referred to the State Industrial Tribunal the question whether the Petitioner's discharge of the 27 former employees was justified. It was in these circumstances that the petitioner filed two petitions Nos. 338 and 339 of 1952. In the former of these petitions (out of which arises Appeal No. 206 of 1954) the petn. challenged the reference made by the State Government to the State Industrial Tribunal by its order dated the 23rd July, 1952, and prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State Government to withdraw the reference, and for a writ in the nature of prohibition to restrain the State Industrial Tribunal from proceeding with the hearing of the reference. In Writ Petition No. 339 of 1952 (out of which arises Apneal No. 205 of 1954) the petitioner challenged the validity of the order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal dated the 15th January, 1952, and prayed that it be quashed by the issue of writ of certiorari.;