- (1.) This appeal raises an interesting and important question in relation to the definition of "appropriate Government" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
(2.) The principal question which arises in this appeal for consideration is whether Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Limited (in short GRSE) is an industry carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government within the meaning of 2 (a) (i) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 reads as follows :- "2(a). "appropriate Government" means (i) in relation to any industrial dispute concerning any industry carried on by or under the authority of the Central Government or by a railway company or concerning any such controlled industry as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government or in relation to an industrial dispute concerning [a Dock Labour Board established under section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 (9 of 1948), or [ the Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited formed and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)] or the Employees' State Insurance Corporation established under section 3 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ( 34 of 1948), or the Board of Trustees constituted under section 3A of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 (46 of 1948), or the Central Board of Trustees and the State Boards of Trustees constituted under section 5A and section 5B, respectively, of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), or the Life Insurance Corporation of India established under section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or [the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)], or the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation established under section 3 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Insurance Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961), or the Central Warehousing Corporation established under section 3 of the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962 (58 of 1962), or the Unit Trust of India established under section 3, or a Board of Management established for two or more contiguous States under section 16, of the Food Corporations Act, 1964 (37 of 1964), or [the Airports Authority of India constituted under section 3 of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994 (55 of 1994)], or a Regional Rural Bank established under section 3 of the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (21 of 1976), or the Export Credit and Guarantee Corporation Limited or the Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India Limited] [the National Housing Bank established under section 3 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987 (53 of 1987)] or an [ { an air transport service, or a banking or an insurance company,} a mine, an oil field,] [ a Cantonment Board,] or a major port, the Central Government, and (ii) in relation to any other industrial dispute, the State Government; The facts leading to this appeal are briefly narrated hereinafter :- In view of dismissal of respondent no. 3 Shri Pradip Kr. Ganguly from service of the appellant Company, a dispute was raised by the said respondent no. 3. The said dispute was referred to the Second Industrial Tribunal by the State Government by an Order of Reference dated 7th February, 1995. In course of proceeding before the said Tribunal an application was filed on behalf of the Company raising the objection that in respect of the said dispute the appropriate Government would be the Central Government and not the State Government and consequently, the reference was wholly without jurisdiction. By an order dated 25th October, 2000 the Respondent Tribunal was pleased to hold that the "appropriate Government" was Central Government.
(3.) The aforesaid decision of the Tribunal was challenged by the respondent no. 3 herein before this Court, in a writ proceeding and by the Judgment and Order dated 21st March, 2002 passed in W.P. No. 3777 (W) of 2001 a learned Judge of this Court was pleased to set aside the decision of the learned Tribunal and sent the matter back on remand for determination of the question whether there was any conferment of authority on the Company by Central Government to carry on the industry in question.;