Rajindra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) This judgment will dispose of Civil Writ Petition No. 1743 of 1967 and 6891 of 1974. I shall first deal with the former petition. The facts which led to the filing of the petition are as follows:-
(2.) Municipal Committee, Pathankot, the petitioner, is having a Fire Brigade Service. On Jan. 16, 1963, the Governor of Punjab passed an order under Sub Rule (6) of Rule 70 of the Defence of India Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) authorising the Fire Officer, Punjab, to take over the Fire Brigade Services of the petitioner and other Committees. The order was revoked vide notification dated July 12, 1967 with effect from July 15, 1967. Madan Lal, General Secretary, District Fire Brigade Workers Union, respondent Nos. 4 and 35 others workers presented petitions under Sec. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Ait, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to the Labour Court at Jullundur claiming that they were entitled to uniforms under the settlement dated April 23, 1965 entered into between the Fire Officer and Workers read with the award dated March 8, 1965 of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak and washing allowance under standing orders of the Fire Service against the petitioner and the Fire Officer, Punjab. The petitioner contested the petitions inter alia on the ground that it was not bound by the alleged settlement and that the standing orders were not binding on it as these were not approved by the Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur. The Labour Court made an award holding that the petitioner and the Officer were liable to pay the amount mentioned in the award dated Nov. 14, 1956 (Annexure A. 10). It has been challenged by the petitioner through this writ petition.
(3.) The first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Labour Court, which has been conferred with the powers under the aforesaid section by the Appropriate Government, can decide the matters. He submits that in the present case the Labour Court, Jullundur had not been conferred with any such power by the Government and, therefore, could not pass an award against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent has produced a notification No 3883-Lab-I-61/16565 dated June 19, 1961, authorising the Labour Court at Jullundur to decide matters under the aforesaid section. In view of the notification, the objection of the counsel for the petitioner has no substance and it is, therefore, rejected.;