- (1.) This Court has heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner, the learned Advocate for the State-respondents and also the learned Advocate for the respondent Nos. 3 to 54. Briefly, the facts of the present case are as follows: There is no dispute that the respondent Nos. 3 to 54 are persons who have retired from the employment of the petitioner-company. It also appears that there is no dispute that the respondent Nos. 3 to 54 are enjoying their pension in terms of the relevant settlement. It appears that an industrial dispute was raised by the respondent Nos. 3 to 54 and by an order of reference the following issues were referred to the respondent No. 1 for adjudication: "(i) Whether the demand of the retired employees as per list enclosed for pension at higher rates as given to the subsequent retirees is justified? (ii) What relief, if any, are they entitled to?"
(2.) Written statement was filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 to 54 and written statement was also filed on behalf of the petitioner-company. The petitioner raised the question of maintainability of the order of reference and took the stand that the said order of reference was without jurisdiction inasmuch as the concerned ex-employees having retired and availed of pension under the respective settlements applicable to them and there being separation of relationship with the management, such ex- employees cannot claim to be workmen as contemplated under section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the issues raised cannot be subject-matter of an industrial dispute under section 2A of the said Act of 1947. For ready reference the order of reference is quoted below: "Government of West Bengal Labour Department I.R. Branch No.247-IR Dated : 6.2.2002 WHEREAS an industrial dispute exists between M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., Brooke House, 9, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 071 Shri S. K. Talukdar and 51 others (mentioned in the enclosed list) their retired employees C/o. Sri D. P. Banerjee, 68, Maharani Indira Devi Rd. (on Biren Hoy's Ground) P.O.- Parnashree, Kolkata-700 060 relating to the undermentioned issues being matters specified in the Third Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947); AND WHEREAS it is expedient that the said dispute should be referred to an Industrial Tribunal constituted under section 7A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947); NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the power conferred by section 10, read with section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Governor is pleased hereby to refer the said dispute to the Fourth Industrial Tribunal constituted under Notification No.808-IR/IR/3A-2/57, dated 11.03.1957 for adjudication; The said Fourth Industrial Tribunal shall submit its award to the State Govt. within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order by the said Fourth Industrial Tribunal in terms of sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), subject to the other provision or provisions of the said Act; The said Fourth Industrial Tribunal shall meet at such places and on such dates as it may direct. Issues(s) (i) Whether the demand of the retired employees, as per list enclosed for pension at higher rates, as given to the subsequent retirees is justified ? (ii) What relief, if any, are they entitled to? By order of the Governor, Sd/- G.H. Chakraborty, Asstt. Secy. to the Govt. of W.B."
(3.) Some of the respondents-retired employees namely respondent Nos. 5, 14 and 28 adduced evidence in support of their claim and documents were exhibited on their behalf as would appear from pages 275 to 286 of the writ petition. On 29.07.2004 an application was filed on behalf of the petitioner wherein the following prayer was made: "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that since the evidence adduced on behalf of the retirees, both oral and documentary, conclusively establish the incompetence of the Reference and lack of jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal to entertain the same, before the evidence of the company, be pleased to reject the instant Reference and pass necessary order or orders in connection therewith." An objection was filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 to 54 against the said application dated 29.07.2004.;