Dipak Prakash Kundu, J. - (1.) Whether the management of M/s. N. D. Mazumder & Co. Contractor (Principal Employer : M/s. Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., Burnpur, Dist : Burdwan) are justified in retrenching the following workmen : (1) Shri Haradhan Paul, (2) Sri Arjun Mishra (3) Sri Rahamatullaha, (4) Sri Thakar Prasad, (5) Sri Ram Kumar, (6) Sri Ainal Haque, (7) Sri Sultan Khan.
(2.) It appears that both the workmen and the writ petitioner filed respective written statements before the Tribunal. Witnesses were examined before the Tribunal. It appears from paragraph 9 of the award that the following questions were; raised before the Tribunal. (1) The Tribunal to decide first whether these seven concerned workmen belonged to HSCO or to this Contractor Firm. (2) the claim of the Union is a stale one as it was referred after a long lapse of time, and cannot be an Industrial Dispute now. (3) The contesting union did not espouse the case of these 7 workmen nor they are members of the said union. (4) The claim of the union is not at all bona fide. (5) The present dispute is hit by double jeopardy and lastly. (6) As the workmen did not claim any relief in their written statements, so they are not entitled to get any relief.
(3.) The same points were argued before this Court also by the learned Advocate for the petitioner in course of this argument. Re : Point No. I. It appears from paragraph 12 of the award that the Tribunal dealt with point No. 1 in the said paragraph. The paragraph 12 of the award is quoted hereinbelow : "Carefully and anxiously considered the submissions of both sides and perused carefully the materials on record. I find from the original reference that the Government described M/s. N.D. Mazumder and Co. as employer of these 7 concerned workmen and I was asked to adjudicate whether the said employer was justified in retrenching the services of these workmen. So, as the Government did not make any issue for adjudication whether the IISCO or M/s. N.D. Mazumder & Co. are the Employer of those concerned workmen. I am not in a position to make such issue and to adjudicate it because it was not at all incidental issue of the original one and it was not at all a question before the Government at the time of making this reference. I also do agree with the learned representative of the workmen that the employer M/s. N.D. Mazumder and Co. did not raise in their written statement such point. There is also no such whisper in the evidence of the witness on behalf of the employer. So, the referred decision Hussain Bhai's case as referred by the learned Advocate of the employer has got no application here. The Government made the reference treating that these concerned workmen are the employees of M/s. N.D. Mazumder and Co. I am unable to go behind the said reference. Thus the first objection as taken by the Learned Advocate of the employer has got no force at all.";