A.S.Bains, J. - (1.) THIS petition has arisen out of a dispute between the Petitioner management and Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 employees of the management. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were employed by the Petitioner -Company as unskilled labourers. They were not allowed to work when they reported for duty on June 2, 1967, by the Petitioner -company. Demand notice was issued by Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 challenging the ' lay off' refusal of giving work to them, as illegal. On the basis of demand notice, the State of Haryana referred the dispute for adjudication vide their notification dated the 7th September, 1967, to the Labour Court.
(2.) CLAIM was filed by Respondents 3 and 4 before the Labour Court alleging that their services were illegally terminated and at any rate they were not permitted to resume their duties. It was also stated that they were illegally laid off in an abnormal manner by the management and they attended the factory daily but they were not allowed to resume duties. The management in their written statement raised a preliminary objection that no individual dispute regarding the propriety or legally of a 'lay off' can be raised and adjudicated upon as an Industrial dispute. It was also stated that the services of Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 had not been terminated and as such the reference is premature. The parties contested on the following issues before the labour Court: - 1. Whether no individual dispute could be raised in this case because in this notice of demand it is only mentioned that the claimants were laid off for the last 5 months and nothing has been paid to them? 2. Whether the reference is premature? Whether the dispute as referred to this Court is vague ? 3.WHETHER the Government has exceeded its executive limits when making this reference to this Court ? 4.WHETHER the reference is invalid because there are individual disputes only while the Government has referred them as dispute between the management and the workmen ? Whether the action of the management in terminating the services of Shrimati Mata Devi and Sat Bhirai or alternatively not allowing them to resume their duties was justified, and 5.IF the above issues are found in favour of the claimants to what relief they are entitled.
(3.) The only material issues are issues Nos. 5, 6 and 7. The Labour Court decided these issues against the management and allowed the claim of the workmen holding that their services were illegally terminated and that the claimants were entitled to their full back wages and reinstatement. It is against the award dated December 30, 1967 (Annexure 'B') of the Labour Court that this writ petition has been filed.;