Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 67 of 1966, decided on 26th August 1968

---‑Tribunal‑Jurisdiction‑‑Reference rejected on withdrawal by workmen's representative‑Award forwarded to Government‑Subsequent application by workmen that representa tive had no authority to withdraw‑Tribunal should not reject such application but decide same on merits and in case established hear the original reference on merits‑‑‑Industrial Disputes Act (XIV of 1947), S. 15

Even though an Industrial Tribunal might have submitted to the Government its award rejecting a reference of an industrial dispute because the representative of the workmen withdrew from the reference, when the concerned workmen make an application to the Tribunal to set aside its order by which the reference had been rejected, on the ground that their representative had no authority to withdraw from the reference, the Tribunal should not reject the application on the ground that it had already submitted its award to the appropriate Government. The Tribunal should decide the application of the workmen on its merits and if it comes to the conclusion that there was no authority on the representa tive to withdraw from the reference, the reference should be heard on its merits.

K. Subba Pao for Petitioner.

K. S. Puttaswamy for Respondent No. 2.

Nemo for the Remaining Respondents.

The Industrial Tribunal in this case rejected a reference under the Industrial Disputes Act when the representative of the workmen withdrew from it.

In an application 'made by the workmen to the Tribunal for a disposal of the reference on its merits, they asserted that the representative had no authority to withdraw from it. ‑But, on the ground that the award bad been submitted to Govern ment, the Tribunal declined to make a decision on that applica tion. That was what the Tribunal said on the application presented by the workmen who called it a review petition, although their application in effect was one in which they requested the Tribunal to set aside the order by which the reference had been rejected and to hear the reference on its merits.

We are of the opinion that the Tribunal should have decided the application presented by the workmen on its merits. It is not within its powers to decline to make that adjudication merely on the ground that it had submitted the award to Government. In that situation, we direct the Tribunal to here the applica tion presented by the workmen on its merits. If it comes to the conclusion there was no authority in the representative to withdraw from the reference, we direct it to set aside its award and to hear the reference on its merits.

The Tribunal will now proceed with the matter as directed by this order.

No costs.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.