SHREE RAM MILLS LTD. Vs. JAGJIVANBHAI RANCHHODJI AHIR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner which is running a foundary at Surat, has challenged the interim order passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Surat, in Reference No. (LCS) 131/77. By the said order the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court found that the respondent No. 1 is a workman within the compass of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act and thus held the preliminary issue, after recording the evidence on this preliminary issue adduced by the respective parties, in favour of the respondent No. 1 herein. The contention of the petitioner Mill Company that the workman was doing supervisory work at the relevant time, when his services were terminated on 11-11-1976, was repelled. This decision of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Surat, on the preliminary issue, is made subject-matter of this petition.

(2.) This matter was admitted for final hearing way back on 1-5-1980 by a Division Bench of this Court and there after interim relief was granted by another Division Bench staying further proceedings in the pending Reference. Thus, the Reference of 1977 is still pending for adjudication before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Surat, though about a decade has lapsed since the filing of the Reference before the Labour Court. In the mean time the proceedings have remained stayed pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court. When this petition reached final hearing before us today we expressed but deep concern about the delay which has ensued in consideration of the Reference C ase before the Labour Court on merits, because of the pendency of the proceedings in this Court.

(3.) In such cases, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of D. P. Maheshwari v. Delhi Administration and Others, AIR 1984 SC 153 neither the Labour Court nor the High Court under Article 226 should hold up the adjudication of the labour disputes before the competent authority on the basis of the decisions on preliminary issues. Chinnappa Reddy, J. speaking for the Supreme Court (Coram: D. A. Desai, O. Chinnappa Reddy and A. Varadarajan, JJ.), has observed as under: