K.N. SINGH, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging validity of the order of the State Government dated February 13, 1974, issued under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, requiring the petitioner-company to pay wages and dear food allowance to its workmen in accordance with the directions contained therein. British India Corporation is a Company which manages a number of Cotton and Woollen Mills in the country. The Cawnpore Woollen Mills is one of them. This Mill manufactures woollen and worsted goods. The workmen of the Mill as well as those of other Textile Mills of Kanpur have been agitating for higher wages and dear food allowance on account of increase in price index. A number of Unions of the workmen of the textile Mills at Kanpur served notice on the management of all the textile Mills of Kanpur pressing for increase in wages and dear food allowance. A similar notice dated January 24, 1973 was served on the employers of the Cawnpore Textile Mills raising a number of demands with a threat that in case the workmen's demands were not fulfilled they would go on token strike. Eight different unions of the workmen of textile Mills of Kanpur served notice on the employers for the revision of wages and linking of dear food allowance to Simla series failing which they threatened to go on strike. The employers failed to meet the demands. The workmen of textile mills including those of the Cawnpore Woollen Mills went on token strike on January 15, 1974. Another strike notice was served by the workmen on the Cawnpore Woollen Mills on January 16, 1974. Similar notices were served by the workmen of all other cotton textile mills of Kanpur threatening to go on strike unless their grievance with regard to wages and dear food allowance was removed. The Labour Minister of the State Government convened a Tripartite Conference on January 28, 1974, which was attended by the Officers of the Labour Department of the Government, representatives of the workmen and employers of the textile mills of Kanpur including the Chairman of the British India Corporation Ltd. The Conference was presided over by the Labour Minister, Sri Raj Mangal Pandey, Discussions were held on January 21, 1974, and February 11, 1974, thereafter the State Government issued notification No." 1085(H.I.) XXVI-3-40(SM) 13 dated February 11, 1974, under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, revising the wages and dear food allowance of the workmen engaged in the textile industry at Kanpur and directing them to pay the same to the workmen in accordance with the directions contained therein. The order expressly stated that it would apply to the Cawnpore woollen Mills also, aggrieved, the British India Corporation Ltd. has challenged the validity of the Government Order by means of this petition.
(2.) Sri S.C. Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that there was no emergency, rather any acute emergency to warrant the exercise of power by the State Government under Sec. 3 (b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. Government order dated January 19, 1973, issued under Section 3 of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act revising wages of the workmen of the petitioner-company was already in force which contemplated constitution of a Tripartite Committee consisting of the representatives of workmen, employers and the State Government to settle and decide the question of revision of wages. Since the order was binding on the workmen as well as the employers there existed no acute emergency rather any emergency for the exercise of powers under Section 3 (b) to increase wages and dear food allowance. Section 3 (b) is in the following terms: "3. Power to prevent strikes, lock out etc.If in the opinion of the State Government it is necessary or expedient so to do for securing the public safety or convenience or the maintenance of public order or supplies and service essential to the life of the community or for maintaining employment, it may be general or special order, make provision (b) for requiring the employers, workmen or both to observe for such period as may be specified in the order, such terms and conditions of employment as may be determined in accordance with the order."
(3.) The above provision confers power on the State Government to issue orders requiring employers and workmen or both to observe such terms and conditions of employment as it may determine in that order for a specified period. This power can be exercised only on the existence of the conditions precedent specified in the enacting clause, viz., the power can be exercised only if the State Government forms opinion that it is necessary to issue order for the purpose of securing public safety or convenience or maintenance of public order and supply and service essential to the life of the community or for maintaining employment. The nature of the power and its scope was considered in State of U. P. v. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd.1961(2) F.L.R. 101=A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 420. The Supreme Court observed that there may be an emergency and the Government may have to act promptly for securing public safety or convenience or the maintenance of public order or supply and services essential to the life of the community or for maintaining employment. Repelling the argument that the purpose which is sought to be achieved by the said provision could be achieved by reference of a dispute to adjudication by an Industrial Tribunal. Labour Court, or Arbitrator, the Supreme Court observed: "The opening words of Section 3 themselves indicate that the provisions thereof are to be availed of in emergency. It is true that even a reference to an Arbitrator of a Conciliator could be made only if there is emergency. But then an emergency may be acute. Such an emergency may necessitate the exercise of powers under clause (b) and a mere resort to those under clause (d) may be inadequate to meet this situation. Whether to resort to one provision or other must depend upon the subjective satisfaction of the State Government upon which powers to act under Section 3 have been conferred by the legislature." The above observations leave no manner of doubt that the State Government is empowered to exercise its power under Section 3 (b) in an emergency. The emergency need not always be acute, although in some cases it may be acute but the existence of emergency is a condition precedent for the exercise of power. On a perusal of the affidavits filed on behalf of the State Government and the respondent-workmen it is clear that on January 15, 1974, the workmen employed in the Textile Mills at Kanpur including the workmen of the Cawnpore Woollen Mills went on strike on January 15, 1974. Eight different Unions of the workmen of Textile Mills of Kanpur served notice on the employers for the revision of wages and linked of dear food allowance to Simla series failing which they threatened to go on strike. There is no dispute that the employers failed to meet the demands of the workmen. The textile industry was thus faced with a situation where the employees were bent upon going on strike. If that was permitted, the entire textile industry at Kanpur would have been paralysed. After discussing the problem with the representatives of the workmen and employers the State Government was satisfied that an acute emergency existed which necessitated the exercise of power under Section 3 (b) of the Act to maintain essential services for the life of the community and for the purpose of maintaining employment in the textile industry at Kanpur. This is clear from the averments contained in paragraphs 42 to 44 of the affidavit of B.N. Chaturvedi, Deputy Secretary to the Government of U.P. in the Labour Department. Proceedings of the Tripartite Conference held on January 28, 1974, show that during the discussion the representative of the workmen stated that the textile mills of the country were not revising the wage structure of its workmen, consequently strike was going on in the textile industry at Bombay and if the wages and dear food allowance of the textile mills at Kanpur were not revised the workmen would go on indefinite strike. The consensus at the Conference was to find out some way to solve the question of neutralization of the increase in the living index and to revise the wages. In the background of these facts and circumstances the State Government bona fide formed opinion that there was emergency necessitating the exercise of power under Section 3 (b) of the Act. Service of strike notices and threat of agitation by the workmen was held sufficient to justify the formation of opinion or the existence of acute emergency and exercise of power under Section 3 (b) of the Act in Hindustan Industries and Machine Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. State of U. P. 1971 L. and I. Case's 1154. and M\s. Laxmi Trading Co. v. State of U. P.,1973(26) F.L.R. 289. Moreover, the impugned order expressly recites, 'and whereas in the opinion of the State Government it is necessary to enforce the said decision for securing public convenience and for maintaining public order and supply essential to the life the community and for maintaining employment.";