(1.) THE writ petition is for the issuance of writ of prohibition against a conciliation officer. As to what circumstances such a writ of prohibition will lie came to be considered by the Supreme Court in U.P. Sales Tax Service Assn. v. Taxation Bar Assn., (1995) 5 SCC 716. In paragraphs 23, 25 and 26, the Supreme Court observed as follows:
(2.) HEARD Mr.Vijay Narayan, learned Senior Counsel leading Mr.K.V.Shanmuganathan counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Arumugam, learned Special Government Pleader taking notice for the first respondent.
(3.) IT was also stated that the petitioner also gave an another police complaint for violent incident took place on 25.1.2008. The management declared paid holidays and stopped production from 25.1.2008 to 28.1.2008. They also initiated disciplinary action against the workmen, who are responsible for the incident. In the meanwhile, the petitioner received representation from the second respondent, stating that they have denied employment to 47 workmen. Thereafter, the Trade union approached the first respondent with the said issue and conciliation proceedings were started. During the proceedings, the second respondent allegedly admitted that disciplinary proceedings are pending against nine workmen and it was further stated that 23 workmen were unemployed. On 2.6.2009, the first respondent conciliation officer advised the workmen to report for duty.