- (1.) THE petitioner, who has filed the present writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and has its registered office at Bijaynagar, Ajmer district.
(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1, who is the only contesting party, is a representative body of the workers of the petitioner-company. On 12th March, 1953 a notice was issued by the company to the effect that on account of unremunerative working of the mill and recurring continuous losses, the mill would be closed from 1st April, 1953 and in pursuance of the said notice, it was actually closed on 1st April, 1953. It continued to remain closed till 14th May, 1954. It started working again on 15th may, 1954 and continued working upto 23rd June 1957, On 24th June 1957 it was closed again. Then, it resumed work on 3rd March 1958. The petitioner retrenched some workers on 30th April 1958 and others on 11th May 1958. On 23rd June 1958, the mill was again closed. These closures and retrenchments raised disputes between the petitioner and its workers. By its Notification No. D. 244/f. 5 (57)Lab/58 dated 15th May 1958, the Government of Rajasthan referred to the industrial Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Industrial disputes, specified in the said notification, between the petitioner and respondent No. 1. The Industrial Tribunal gave its award on 31st March 1960, but both the parties filed writ applications nos. 351 and 431 of 1960 in this Court to challenge its validity. Both the writs were partly allowed by a Division Bsnch of this Court on 8th March 1963 and the award was set aside on certain points and the Industrial Tribunal was directed to give a fresh award in accordance with the directions of the court. Thereafter on 9th December 1964, the Industrial Tribunal passed an order which is marked as ex. C. It was observed by it that "it was necessary to draw a list of the workmen who were entitled to retrenchment benefits under Section 25fff read with Section 25f of the Industrial Disputes Act in respect of the closure of the Bijay Cotton Mills dated 24th June 1957. Those workmen who had put in 240 days of work during the twelve months preceding 24th June 1957 shall be entitled to claim the benefit under Section 25fff and a list of the names of all such employees shall accordingly be prepared by both the parties and submitted within a week. " It was further observed that "as regards calculating completed years of service of such workmen, it may be noted that the period of their services shall be computed from the date they first joined the service of the mill and the period between 1st April 1933 upto the 15th May 1954 when the mill remained closed shall be excluded from such computation. " It was contended on behalf of the petitioner before the industrial Tribunal that period before the 15th May 1954 should be excluded for the purpose of computing the total service of the workers, but this plea was rejected. It is against this order of the Industrial Tribunal that the present writ application is directed.
(3.) THE petitioner has raised two-fold objections in this Court. It is urged, in the first instance, that the Industrial Tribunal has committed an obvious mistake in computing the period of workers' services prior to 15th May 1954. It is next contended that the Tribunal has committed another mistake in holding that those workmen who had put in 240 days of work during the twelve months preceding the 24th June 1957, shall be entitled to claim the benefit under Section 25fff of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, which will hereinafter be referred to as the "act". It would be proper to deal with both the points in seriatim.;