- (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.There was one Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, which was engaged in the business of manufacturing of Hard Coke at Sudamdih in the district of Dhanbad. However, in the year 1972, Coking Coal Mines (Nationalization) Act, 1972, came into being whereby Coking Coal Mines and even Coke Oven Plants were taken over by the government, but Coke Oven Plant of Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company could not be taken over, as the owner of the said Coking Plant, filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court whereby, one P.D. Ajmera, one of the partners of the said Hard Coke Manufacturing Company and one R.N. Sharma representative of M/s B.C.C.L., were appointed as Joint Receiver to manage affairs of the said Hard Coke Manufacturing Company. Being aggrieved with that order, M/s B.C.C.L. filed an appeal before the Calcutta High Court, wherein order passed by the learned Single Judge, was modified to the extent that one Om Prakash Gupta, Chief Administrative Officer of Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, was appointed as Manager under the Joint Receiver. Subsequently, said case was transferred to Honble Supreme Court, which ultimately was dismissed by the judgment dated 10.12.1982, holding the said Act to be constitutionally valid and thereby, the Management of the said Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company vested in M/s B.C.C.L. Even after order was passed by the Honble Supreme Court, the Management of Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, did not handover the possession of the said Company and, therefore, M/s B.C.C.L. had to move again before the Honble Supreme Court for a direction to the aforesaid Company to handover the possession of the said company. Accordingly, the Honble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 29.07.1983, directed Mr. P.D. Ajmera to handover the possession of the said company to M/s B.C.C.L. and as per the order, the process of handing over the possession of the said company was to commence from 16.08.1983 and was to be completed within a period of six weeks. Pursuant to that, M/s B.C.C.L. could get actual possession of the plant on 20.09.1983, but the functioning of the said company could not be started, as the machines were completely damaged. After six years, the Central Government in exercise of the power conferred under Clause d(1)(2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the dispute for adjudication to the Tribunal. The term of reference was as follows: - "Whether the demand of Dhanbad Colliery Karamchari Sangh -Kamla Shankar Dubey and 51 Ors. workmen working with Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, Sudamdih in the district of Dhanbad be regularized in the service of M/s B.C.C.L. w.e.f. 20.09.1983 is justified? If so, to what relief these workmen are entitled? The Tribunal after taking into account the materials placed before it, did hold that M/s B.C.C.L. came into possession of the plant on 20.09.1983, whereas the plant had already been closed in the middle of December, 1982 and as such workmen of Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, cannot be ordered to be regularized in the employment of M/s B.C.C.L. It was however, held that, they are entitled for retrenchment compensation under Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act from the management of Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company and are entitled to re -employment incase of Hard Coke Manufacturing Company is reopened. Being aggrieved with that order passed by the Tribunal, one of the workmen namely, Kamla Shankar Dubey (petitioner) has preferred this writ petition, challenging the order of the Tribunal, on the ground that after the order was passed by the Honble Supreme Court, holding that M/s Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company vested in M/s B.C.C.L., M/s B.C.C.L. took over the possession of the said company on 20.12.1982 on which date, it was in running condition, but the Tribunal wrongly decided that M/s B.C.C.L. took over the possession of the said company on 20.09.1983 and on that date the company was closed. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and on going through the records, including the order passed by the Tribunal, I do find that even after the order was passed by the Honble Supreme Court on 10.12.1982, holding the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalization) Act, 1972 to be constitutionally valid, the possession of the said company was not handed over to M/s B.C.C.L. Thereupon, an application was filed in the year 1983 before the Honble Supreme Court by M/s B.C.C.L. for an appropriate direction to Mr. P.D. Ajmera to handover the possession of the said company and the Honble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 29.07.1983, directed Mr. P.D. Ajmera to handover the possession of the said company and according to M/s B.C.C.L. it came into possession w.e.f. 29.09.1983, which fact was established by M/s B.C.C.L., whereas the workmen failed to establish that M/s B.C.C.L. took possession over the management of the said company in December, 1982. The Management also produced satisfactory evidence that on the date when M/s B.C.C.L. took possession over the plant, it was closed. It was also placed before the Tribunal on behalf of the B.C.C.L. that earlier a similar dispute was raised on behalf of the Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, for regularization of 184 employees of the said Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company to the roll of M/s B.C.C.L., wherein the Tribunal had held that M/s B.C.C.L. took possession over the said company on 20.9.1983, on which date the plant was closed and, therefore, they are not entitled to regularization rather they are entitled to retrenchment compensation under Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act. The said order, on being challenged, was affirmed by the High Court and even by the Honble Supreme Court. The Tribunal having taken into consideration all these aspects of the matter, did hold that the petitioner -Kamla Shankar Dubey as well as other 51 persons are not entitled to regularization in the roll of M/s B.C.C.L. rather they are only entitled to retrenchment compensation under Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act from the management of the said Sanjeev Hard Coke Manufacturing Company, which order, in the facts and circumstances as stated above, is quite legal and it does not suffers from any illegality. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and hence, this writ petition is dismissed.;