- (1.) Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
(2.) In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a co-operative society, who is the employer of the workmen has assailed the order dated 30th September, 2005 passed by the learned Judge, Seventh Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, Calcutta in Case No. VIII-74/02 whereby and whereunder the application praying interim relief in terms of section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was allowed granting relief to the extent of payment of 50% of last wages for the first three months and thereafter @ 75% of the last wage being effective from the date cf filing application month by month till the disposal of the reference case.
(3.) This application has been opposed by the workmen through the learned Advocate. The learned senior Advocate, Mr. Bhunia appearing for the petitioner submits that as the service of 240 days in the year was not at all completed and/or not fulfilled having regard to the provision of law under the Industrial Disputes Act, namely section 25B for the purpose of declaring the workman as in continuous service, no relief could be granted in absence of such working days and hence there was no prima facie case to grant relief in the application under section 15(2)(b) of the said Act as filed. Mr. Bhunia further submits that section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as applicable to the West Bengal in terms of its amendment in 1980 has stipulated a time limit of passing such interim relief namely, within 60 days from the date of the order referring such industrial dispute and in the instant case that condition since has not been fulfilled, hence, after expiry of the time limit, learned Tribunal had no jurisdiction to grant any relief any he ought to have adjudicated the entire dispute as referred to. The said legal submission is opposed by the learned Advocate appearing for the workmen by contending, inter alia, that 240 days working in a year for declaration that workman is in continuous service for the purpose of availability of the relief in the case of retrenchment has no applicability in the instant case as in terms of the appointment letter read with the evidence led by the employer through its witness, it was satisfied tkat the leave applications were duly received by the employer and without giving notice the service was terminated. It has been further urged that the said issue namely, applicability of the time limit of 240 days-to obtain status of the continuous service- holder for getting any relief with reference to the application under section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in respect of the self-same parties have already been decided in an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby the maintainability question on that score as was allowed in favour of the workmen by the learned Tribunal below was assailed in the said revisional application registered as C.O. No. 564 of 2005. It is accordingly contended that the res judicata principle is squarely applicable on said issue. About time limit fixed under section 15(2)(b) of the said Act, it is contended that the time limit had no mandatory, consequences to make any order void if it is passed after expiry of the said period.;