S.S. Sudhalkar, J. - (1.) THIS order will dispose of four writ petitions No. 880, 3820, 16052 and 16180 of 2000. Civil writ petitions No. 3820 of 16052 of 2000 arise out of the same award. Similarly, the other two writ petitions arise from the same award.
(2.) WRIT petitions 880 and 3820 of 2000 have been filed by the employer, while the other two writ petitions have been filed by the workman. The employer has challenged the awards of the Labour Court on the ground that the reference made by the State Government were not proper because they were not the reference by the appropriate Government. According to the employer, the appropriate Government was the Central Government and not the State Government. When the writ petitions filed by the employer came up for motion hearing, notice of motion was issued only qua this point. The arguments are also advanced on this point only. In the other two writ petitions, the workmen have challenged the awards qua denial of back wages. In the reference under challenge in civil writ petitions only 50% back wages ware awarded. First, I will take up the question of validity of the reference made by the State Government. The petitioner is "Central State Farm, Hissar". As mentioned above, the only question to be decided in the writ petitions filed by the employer is, whether the reference made by the State Government was a valid reference or not. The Labour Court has, by the impugned awards, set aside the termination of service of the workmen. Even if, for the sake of arguments, it is accepted that the reference was not by the appropriate Government the quashing of the awards on that point would lead to the revival of the illegal orders of termination and, therefore, the writ petitions should not be entertained in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Gadde Venkateswara Rao v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and others, AIR 1966 S C 825, as followed in the case of Jagan Singh v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajastlian and another Leaving aside this technical aspect, I shall go to consider whether the reference were not by the appropriate Government. The Labour Court has relied on Annexure P9 produced in civil writ petition 3820 of 2000. It is a resolution of the Government of India dated 15.7.1969, regarding the transfer of full administrative control of the Central State Farms to the State Farms Corporation Ltd. with effect from 1.8.1969.The text of the resolution is as under: "The Government of India have set up a number of Central State Farms for the primary purpose of production of improved varieties of seeds in different parts of the country. These Farms have so far been running as departmental organisations but this argument has not been found entirely satisfactory. The Farms are essentially commercial organisations and should run as such unhampered by the procedures which govern the working of Government Departments. It has, therefore, been decided that acompany under the company law should be set up to take over and run the existing Farms as well as any Central State Farms to be set up in future. The State Farms Corporation of India Ltd., has accordingly been set up by the Government of India for this purpose and the Government of India have not (now ?) decided to transfer the full administrative control of the following Central State Farms to the State Farms Corporation Ltd. with effect from 1.8.69. 1. Central State Farm, Suratgarh (Rajasthan) 2. Centra! State Farm, Jetsar ( -do -) 3. Central State Farm, Hirakud P.O. Jharsuguda
(3.) CENTRAL State Farm, Jullundur City (Punjab);