Subrata Talukdar, J. - (1.) In this writ petition the petitioners challenge the notices issued against each of them by the Conciliation Officer and Deputy Labour Commissioner, West Bengal in connection with a conciliation proceeding under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 1947 Act) connected to the dismissal from service of an employee of the Calcutta Club Ltd. The employee concerned is impleaded as the respondent no.5 to the writ petition and the Club is impleaded as respondent no.6.
(2.) Mr. Partha Sarathi Sengupta, learned senior counsel, appearing for the petitioners takes this Court to several provisions of the 1947 Act which delineate the nature and responsibilities as well as the carriage of proceedings by a Conciliation Officer. Mr. Sengupta makes the primary point based on the statutory provisions of the 1947 Act that, at best the proceedings by a Conciliation Officer is quasi-judicial in nature and cannot be equated with the proceedings of final adjudication by an Industrial Court/Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal/Arbitrator.
(3.) Highlighting the salient aspects of such quasi-judicial proceedings by a Conciliation Officer under the 1947 Act, Mr. Sengupta points out that upon a failure of any conciliation the matter will be referred to the Industrial Court/Tribunal for adjudication as an industrial dispute. In support of his submissions as above Mr. Sengupta relies upon two decisions of this Hon'ble Court reported in (1957) I LLJ page 218 in the matter of Royal Calcutta Gulf Club Ltd. And State of West Bengal & Ors. and 2009 (3) CLJ 294 (High Court) in the matter of ABN & Amro Bank v. Union of India & Ors .;