LexTATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD versus S. N. MODAK
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H TATA moN AND STEEL co. LTD. v. S. N. MODAK March 19, 1965 411 JP. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., K. N. WANCHOO AND V. RAMASWAMI, JJ.J Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (14 of 1947\, s. 33-Application pending industrial dispute-Industrial dispute finalty decided-If appiicaLion survives. The appel'ant applied under s. 33(2)(b) of the Ind.ustrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal for the Tribunal's ap- proval of the order passed by the appellant discharging its employee -the respondent. This ai:plication was made because certain in- dustrial disputes were prnding hetween the appellant and its employees, but when the matter came to be argued before the Tribunal. the pending disputes had been disposed of. HYence, the a;ipel!ant contended that the application made by it no longer sur- vived, which the Tribunal rejected. In appeal by Special Leave. HELD: The Tribunal was right in overruling the appellant's contention. [419 E]. A proceeding validly commenced under s. 33(2)(bl would not automatically come to an end merely because the main industrial c!:spute had in the meanwhile been finally determined. [417 D-E]. The application of the appellant can 1in a sense, be treated as an incidental proceeding; but it is a separate proceeding all the same, and in that sense it will be governed by the provi:::ions of s. 33(2)(b) as an independent' proceeding. It is not an interlocutory proceeding properly so called in its full sense and significance; it is a proceeding between the employer and his employee who was no doubt concuned with the main industrial dispute along with other employees; but it is nevertheless a proceeding between two parties in res;o2ct of a matter not covered by the main dispute. [417 B-D]. The order being incomplete and inchoate until tile approval is obtained, cannot effectively terminate the relationship of the employer and the employee between the appellant and the res- pondent; and so even if the main industrial dispute was finally dcc'dcc1. the qucs'.ion abcut the validity of the order· would still have to be tried and if the appr·oval is not accorded by the Tribunal, the employer would be bound to treat the respQndent: as its em- ployee and pay him full wages for the period even though the appellant may subsequently proceed to terminate th<;- respondent's service. [ 418 C-El. Besides, if it were held that with the final determination of the main industrial dispute such application would autcmatically come to an end, it would mean that s. 33-A under which a complaint by the employee is treated as an independent proceedin!\, would be rendered nugatory. [419 A]. Alkali and Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. v. Seventh Industrial Tribunal. West Bengal and Ors. (1964) II L.L.J. 568, Mettur Industries Ltd. v. Sundara Naidu and Anr. (1963) II L.L.J. 303 and Shah (A.T.) v. State of Mysore and Ors (1964) I L.L.J. 237, dis- approved Kannan Devan Hill Produce Company Ltd. Munnar v. Miss Aleyamma Varughesa and Anr. (1962) II LL.J. 158, Om Prakash Sharma v. Industrial Tribunal, Punjab and Anr. (1962\ II L.LJ. 272 and Amrit Bazar Patrika (Private) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Tribunal and Ors. (1964) II L.L.J. 53, approved. 412 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1965] 3 8.C.R. CrvrL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 422 of A 1964. Appeal by special leave from the order dated September 29, 1962, of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Dhanbact in Application No. 45 of 1960 in Reference Nos. 40 and 34 of 1960. S. V. Gupte, Solicitor-Genera/ and /. N. Shroff, for the appel- B !ant. Jitendra Sharma and Janardan Sharma, for the respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Gajendragadkar, C.J. The short question of law which u arises in this appeal relates to the scope and effect of the provisions contained ins. 33(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (No. 14 o[ 1947) (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The appellant, the Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., Jamadoba, applied before the Chairmun, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, (hereafter called "the Tribunal") under s. 33(2)(b) of the Act for approval of the order D passed by it discharging the respondent, its employee S. N. Modak. from its service. In its application, the appellant alleged that the respondent had been appointed as a Grade II Clerk in the Chief Mining Engineer's Office at Jamadoba. One of the duties assigned to the respond
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.