OIL INDIA LTD Vs. G N BORAH PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL DIBRUGARH ASSAM
LAWS(CAL)-1977-6-32
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 23,1977

OIL INDIA LTD Appellant
VERSUS
G N BORAH PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL DIBRUGARH ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) ON the 31st January, 1968, 22 workmen were dismissed by the appellant Oil India Ltd. , Duliajan, Assam. On January 27, 1971, the Central Government made a reference under section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to Mr. G. N. Borah, Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dibrugarh for adjudication of the following industrial dispute : "whether the action of the management of Oil India Limited, Duliajan in dismissing the following thirteen workmen is justified? If not, to what relief are the work men concerned entitled to from the dates of their dismissal. It may be mentioned here that out of 22 workmen dismissed the reference was only made in respect of 13 workmen mentioned in the order of reference.
(2.) PRIOR to the order of reference, on December 14, 1970 the respondent No. 2 and another acting on behalf of themselves being workmen Nos. 2 and 5 as also three others being workmen Nos. 8, 10 and 12 in the order of reference filed an application before the Central Government Labour Court, Assam under section 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act for computing their entitlements as if they were never dismissed. When this application was pending, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal to whom the reference was made as aforesaid published an interim Award on June 13, 1972 holding that it would refrain from adjudicating the dispute of workmen Nos. 2, 5, 8, 10 and 12 as they voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of a court which was capable of giving adequate relief to their grievances. Thereafter, on August 26, 1972, the Labour Court held that the application made before it under Section 33c (2) of the said Act was premature in view of the pending reference before the Industrial Tribunal and the application was accordingly dismissed by the Labour Court. An application for review of the aforesaid interim Award was filed by the workmen concerned on December 8, 1972 before the Industrial Tribunal to which the appellant company filed opposition and rejoinder was also filed by the workmen. By an order dated October 16, 1974, the Government of India, in exercise of powers under section 7a (1) and Section 33b of the Act, withdrew the proceedings before the said Industrial Tribunal and transferred the same to Mr. E. K. Moidu, Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta for disposal of the said proceedings with the direction that the said Tribunal would proceed with the proceedings from the stage at which it was transferred to it and to dispose of the same according to law. Thereafter, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Dibrugarh before whom the reference was so pending directed by its order dated November 11, 1974 the transfer of the records of the reference to the Presiding Officer, Central Government industrial Tribunal at Calcutta as directed by the Central Government order mentioned above. On January 31, 1975, the workmen concerned withdrew the review application. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Calcutta by the notice of February 17, 1975 intimated the date of hearing of the reference at Dibrugarh on March 17, 1975. On March 10, 1975 the respondent No. 2. being the workman No. 5 moved an application in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for quashing the interim Award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal on June 13, 1972 as already stated. On this application, a rule nisi was issued by this Court giving rise to the Matter No. 74 of 1975. This matter was disposed of by A. N. Sen, J. by the judgment and order dated June 28, 1975 whereby the rule nisi was made absolute and the interim Award of June 13, 1972 was set aside and quashed. The Court further directed that the Tribunal was to proceed with the reference expeditiously.
(3.) THE company preferred this appeal against the aforesaid decision and in the said appeal, this Court gave liberty to the Tribunal to proceed with the hearing of the reference with the direction that the Tribunal would not publish its Award till the disposal of this appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.