THE STATE OF BIHAR Vs. NATHUNI PANDEY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the State of Bihar through the Chief Administrator, River Valley Projects Department, and a prayer has been made to quash the award (Annexure 5) given by Sri I. Prasad, who was appointed Arbitrator under Sec. 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter to be called "the Act", on behalf of River Valley Projects Department, Kosi Project, Birpur, and Kosi Project Workers' Association, Bhimnagar. Nathuni Pandey (opposite party no. 1) was working as a Senior Mechanic in the Bharda Division of the Barrage Circle, Kosi Project, Birpur. On the ground that opposite party no. 1 was suspected of having taken part in communal activities, he was transferred from Bharda Division, Kosi Project, Birpur, to Sone Barrage Project, Indrapuri by River Valley Projects Department Wireless Message No. 3733 dated the 6th November, 1967, and was asked to join there without availing joining time. A copy of the said message has been made Annexure '2' to this writ application. It appears that a number of telegrams and letters were sent to the Government by Kosi Project Workers' Union for cancellation of the transfer order on the ground that opposite party no. 1 was one of the office bearers of the Kosi Project Workers' Association, Bhimnagar. It was also alleged that Nathuni Pandey had been transferred in a wrongful manner to cut down the activities of the Association affiliated to the Indian National Trade Union Congress. The Labour Department of the Government of Bihar on receipt of the information from the Labour Union sources considered the dispute to be an industrial dispute between the Management of Kosi Project Workers' Association, Birpur, and their workmen represented by the Kosi Project Association, Bhimnagar (Saharsa), and a notice to that effect was given by Sri B. Singh, Deputy Commissioner of Labour and Conciliation Officer, Patna, intimating that he would hold conciliation proceedings. A conciliation proceeding was actually held on 27.11.1967 and 1.12.1967. Ultimately an agreement was purported to have been made in Form 'C' prescribed under the Industrial Disputes (Bihar) Rules, 1961, hereinafter to be referred to as "the Bihar Rules", to refer to Sri I. Prasad, Commissioner of Labour, Bihar, the following dispute for arbitration:

(2.) The learned Advocate General challenged the validity of the award on three grounds. In the first place, he submitted that there was no valid agreement to refer the dispute to arbitration of the agreement was not executed in accordance with the mandatory provisions of Sec. 10A(2) of the Act read with Rule 8 of the Bihar Rules. Secondly he submitted that the reference was incompetent as the agreement to refer the dispute to arbitration was made in contravention of Article 299 of the Constitution. Lastly, he urged that the Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to dissect the terms of the reference and to decide one part of the reference only.

(3.) I will deal with the first ground, which has been urged by the learned Advocate General in support of his contention that the award given by the Arbitrator is invalid. As laid down in Sec. 10A(1) of the Act, where any industrial dispute exists or is apprehended and the employer and the workmen agree to refer the dispute to arbitration, they may by a written agreement refer the dispute to arbitration of such person as may be specified in the arbitration agreement. Sec. 10A(2) of the Act provides that an arbitration agreement shall be in such form and shall be signed by the parties thereto in such manner as may be prescribed. Rules 7 and 8 of the Bihar Rules are the relevant rules relating to arbitration agreement. Rule 7 provides that an arbitration agreement for the reference of an industrial dispute to an Arbitrator shall be made in Form 'C' and shall be delivered personally or forwarded by registered post in duplicate to the Secretary to the Government of Bihar in the Labour Department with copies to the Labour Commissioner, Bihar, and the Conciliation Officer. It also provides that the agreement shall be accompanied by the consent, in writing of the arbitrator. Rule 8 provides as follows: