S.S. Sudhalkar, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is filed by the employer challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Punjab (here in after referred as the "Tribunal") vide which it held that the action of the Petitioner in laying off the workmen with effect from 22.1.1998 is illegal and unjustified from its inception and that it continued to be so till it was lifted with effect from 24.7.1998. It further held that the workmen are entitled to the payment of full wages, allowances and other benefits which would have been payable to them if they had worked during that period of lay -off ice. from 22.1.1998 to 23.7.1998.
(2.) THE strength of the workmen on the date of lay off declared by the management was 375. 338 workmen were laid off vide its notice dated 21.1.1998. The workers' union vide its letter dated 22.1.1998 challenged the legality of the lay off by the management and contended that it was in violation of the provisions of Section 25 -M of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and that the workmen are en -titled to full wages for the lay -off period. They also demanded lifting of the lay off. The Petitioner also intimated the Labour Commissioner vide its letter dated 23.1.1998 of its action in the laying off 338 workmen out of 375 in its establishment stating that it had to be done due to depressed market conditions and financial difficulties faced by it for procurement of the raw material and that the workmen are entitled to compensation under Section 25 -C of the Act which would be paid to them. The conciliation proceedings took place but no settlement could be reached and as a result the dispute was referred by the Labour Commissioner to the Industrial Tribunal. During the pendency of the reference, the management lifted lay off with effect from 24.7.1998. The Tribunal vide its award has come to the conclusion that the act of the management in laying off the workmen was illegal and unjustified as stated above.
(3.) THE case of the Petitioner is; (i) that the electric power has been cut off because of the order of the Pollution Control Board and, therefore, the mill could not function and the lay off was justified; (ii) A copy of the demand notice dated 17.2.1998 was not served on the management and hence the reference was void ab initio and the Government could have made the reference without conciliation proceedings pursuant to the demand notice dated 17.2.199.8; 3. That the factory was closed on 19.2.1998 and, therefore, there could not be any lay off; 4. That the lay off was because of the depressed market condition and the financial difficulties faced by the management and that the same were emanated from the earlier closure ordered by the Pollution Control Board and continued disconnection of electric and water supply;;