Dipankar Datta, J. - (1.) The Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department upon noting that an industrial dispute exists between Messrs. Indian Iron & Steel Company Limited, Burnpur Works, Post Office Burnpur, District Burdwan (hereafter the company) and its employees, represented by Burnpur Ispat Karmachari Sangh and their workmen, by an order dated January 17/24, 2005 referred such dispute to the Ninth Industrial Tribunal at Durgapur, District Burdwan (hereafter the tribunal) in exercise of power conferred by section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereafter the ID Act) for determination of the following issue(s): a) Whether the claim of the union for regularization of the services of 159 workmen (vide list enclosed) in the company is justified? b) What relief, if any, are they entitled?
(2.) The tribunal entered upon the reference, registered the reference as Case No.X-1/2005, and put the disputing parties on notice. Claim statement and written statement of defence having been filed, the parties led evidence, ~ both oral and documentary. Upon consideration thereof, the Judge of the tribunal delivered his award dated September 4, 2009. Operative part of the award reads as follows: "That the case under reference is allowed on contest. An award is passed directing the company to treat the workmen under reference as the workmen of the management and identical pecuniary benefits and other service benefits at per with other workmen already admitted in company's roll and such benefits to be extended with effect from January 24, 2005 being the date of reference."
(3.) The aforesaid award was called in question by Steel Authority of India Limited (hereafter 'SAIL') before this Court in WP 20732(W) of 2009 by invoking its writ jurisdiction. Incidentally, the company which was initially a subsidiary of SAIL has since been taken over by SAIL and is now one of its several units. The writ petition was defended on behalf of the contesting respondent (the union) by one of its members, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mitra, appearing in person. Upon a contested hearing, the learned Judge of the writ court by a judgment and order dated January 17, 2017 dismissed the writ petition. His Lordship was of the view that the tribunal had duly examined whether the employment of the workmen by alleged contractors was a sham or camouflage arrangement and had correctly arrived at its finding. His Lordship was also of the view that SAIL had failed to demonstrate perversity in the award of the tribunal.;