CHANDRABALI Vs. CHIEF MINING ENGINEER TATA IRON AND STEEL CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Chandrabali was employed as a Machinecut Coal Loader in Jamadoba Colliery belonging to Messrs. Tata Iron and Steej Company Limited, The petitioner was recruited through the agency of the Coalfield Recruiting Organization for employment, under the management of the Jamadoba Colliery as a Machine-cut Coal Loader. The petitioner had gone on leave on the 10th May, 1958, for a period of fourteen days and the grant of his leave was made by the Unit Supervisor of the Coalfield Recruiting Organization (which will be hereafter referred to as C. R. O. in this judgment). While at home the petitioner applied for an extension of leave with medical certificate dated the 1st June, 1958, for a further period of three weeks. His application was received by the Unit Supervisor on the 7th June, 1958. The petitioner applied for a further extension of leave for two weeks with another medical certificate. Subsequently the petitioner returned for work on the 7th July, 1958, but he was not permitted to join. The matter of the petitioner's discharge was taken up by the Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, which wrote to the Colliery Manager stating that the petitioner had been unfairly treated in violation of the Standing Orders of the Company. The matter was not amicably settled and, on the report of the Conciliation Officer, the Government of India referred the Industrial dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The issues which were contained in the order of reference were (1) whether the discharge of Sri Chandrabali was justified, and (2) if not, what relief he is entitled to and with effect from which date. On the 12th May, 1960, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal made an award stating that the discharge of Sri Chandrabali was justified.

(2.) The petitioner has now obtained a rule from the High Court calling upon the respondents to show cause why the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal should not be set aside by the High Court by virtue of the authority granted to it under Article 227 of the Constitution.

(3.) On behalf of the petitioner it was submitted In the first place that the Tribunal was erroneous as a matter of law in holding that the petitioner was not a "workman" within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act and there was no nexus or relationship of master and servant between the petitioner and the management of the Jamadoba Colliery. On behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel referred to the definition of "workman" contained in Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which states that "workman" means