P.N.MOOKERJEE, J. -
(1.)THIS rule is directed against an award and the connected proceeding under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner, Blackwooda India Ltd., seeks to have the aforesaid award and proceeding quashed by an appropriate writ of certiorari and it seeke further, the issue of appropriate writs of mandamus and prohibition, commanding the opposite parties to forbear and refrain from enforcing and giving effect to the said award or taking steps in that behalf and also prohibiting them from doing the same. The rule arose under the following circumstances.
(2.)BY a notice, dated 8 May 1957, the petitioner company purported to close the Underwood Typewriters and O.E. Service Station (Eastern Division), which was described therein as an industry, on economic grounds and to terminate the services of all workers thereof with effect from the said date, namely, 8 May 1957. This termination of service was, according to the above notice, due to the aforesaid closure of the 'industry' the Underwood Typewriters and O.E. Service Station (Eastern Division). This action of the company was challenged by the Workers' Union (Blackwoods Workers' Union) and the said union characterized the company's plea of economic ground as a false plea and they challenged the aforesaid closure as mala fide and the proposed termination of the workers' service as unjust, unfair and opposed to the principles of natural justice. The resulting industrial dispute was referred by the State Government to the appropriate industrial tribunal for adjudication by or under the following order: - -
GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL LABOUR DEPARTMENT Order No. 2223 -IR; IR/11L -288/57, Calcutta, 27 June 1957
Whereas an industrial dispute exists between Blackwoods India Ltd., 2, Mangoe Lane; Calcutta, and their workmen (service mechanics represented by Blackwoods Workers' Union, 3, Commercial Buildings. Calcutta -1), relating to the undermentioned issue, being a matter specified in the second schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(XIV of 1947);
And, whereas, it is expedient that the said dispute should be referred to a labour court constituted under Section 7 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (XIV of 1947);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 10 of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (XIV of 1947), the Governor is pleased hereby to refer the said dispute to the first labour court, constituted under notification No. 1025 -IR/IR/3A -3/57, dated 5 April 1957, for adjudication.
The said first labour court shall meet at such places and on such dates as it may direct.
Issue: Is the discharge of the service mechanics, employed by the Blackwood's India Ltd., in 'underwood Typewriter and O.E. Service Station' at 2, Mangoe Lane, Calcutta, by their notice, dated 3 May 1957, justified?
To what relief are they entitled? (By order of the Governor.) (Sd.) S.K. Banerji, Jt. Secy, to the Govt. of West Bengal. No. 2223/2 (4) -IR - -Copy forwarded for Information to Blackwoods India Ltd., 2, Mangoe Lane, Calcutta. (Sd.) -(Illegible),Calcutta, 27 June 1957. Asst. Secretary._________ GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL LABOUR DEPARTMENT No. 2650 -IR; IR/11L -288/57, Calcutta, 23 July 1957
Corrigendum: In the 'issue' mentioned in the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department No. 2223 -IR/IR/11L -288/57, dated 27 June 1957, for 'notice dated 3 May 1957,' read 'notice dated 8 May 1957.'
(By order of the Governor) (Sd.)S.K. Banerji, Jt. Secy, to the Govt. of West Bengal.
No. 2650/2 (4) -IR -Copy forwarded for information to Blackwoods India Ltd., 2, Mangoe Lane, Calcutta. (Sd.) -(Illegible),Calcutta, 23 July 1957. Asst. Secretary.
The tribunal answered the reference by its award which summed up Its conclusions as follows: - -
Thus to sum up, the termination of the services of these employees Is found justified and they are found entitled to compensation according to Section 25F(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act which the company must pay within a month of the publication of the award.
(3.)IT is really the last part of the above quoted award, relating to payment of compensation, which is challenged by the petitioner. It is, obviously, not aggrieved by the other part thereof which holds that the termination of the services of the employees was justified.