- (1.) THIS is an application for a Certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 134a of the Constitution. The Certificate has been prayed for in respect of our judgment passed by us in F. M. A. No. 344 of 1979, (reported) 84 CWN 344 ). affirming the judgment of Basak, J. While upholding the award of the Tribunal, it was held by us that the dispute raised by the car drivers of the applicant company was an industrial dispute.
(2.) MR. R. C. Deb, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant, has raised the following questions as substantial questions of law of general importance: i) When there is in existence a Union of the workmen of a company, whether espousing the dispute of an insignificant number of workmen (12 out of 1000) by an outside general Union would make the dispute an industrial dispute so as to enable the State Government to make an order of reference u/s. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act; ii) When there is in existence a Union of the workmen employed by the company and there is no Union of any particular class or category or craft of the workmen of the Company, whether a dispute espoused by an outside general Union representing workmen of different industries and not being a Union of any particular craft could be termed as industrial dispute so as to enable the State Government make an order of reference u/s. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act; iii) Whether an outside general Union purporting to represent different categories of workmen of a particular industry can espouse an industrial dispute in respect of workmen of a particular class/category of another industry; iv) Whether a dispute espoused by an-outside general Union in respect of workmen belonging to a particular class or category would become an industrial dispute although the same has not been espoused by the Union of the workmen of the company ; v) Whether there can be any inference of employer-employee relationship only because of the fact that an order of reference has been made by the Government u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
(3.) MR. Parthasarathi Sengupta, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 3, the Motor Workers Union, has taken a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the application. It is contended by him that after the amendment of Article 133 (1) and the introduction of Article 134a in the Constitution by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, no written application is maintainable for a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court. He submits that as provided in Article 134a. the aggrieved party has to make an oral application before the Court immediately after the passing or making of the judgment, decree, final order or sentence, as the case may be. Article 134a does not contemplate the making of a written application for a certificate for appeal. Article 133 (1), as amended, inter alia provides that an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India if the High Court certifies under Article 134a etc. Article 134a provides as follows; "every High Court, passing or making a judgment, decree, final order, or sentence, referred to in clause (1) of Article 132 of clause (1) of Article 133, or clause (1) of Article 134, (a) may, if it deems fit so to do, on its own motion, and (b) shall, if an oral application is made by or on behalf of the party aggrieved, immediately after the passing or making of such judgment, decree, final order or sentence, determine, as soon as may be after such passing or making, the question whether a certificate of the nature referred to in clause. (1) of Article 132, or clause (1) of Article 133 or, as the case may be, sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of Article 134, may be given in respect of that case. ";