Judicial discipline obliges a Bench of two learned judges to follow the decision of a Constitution Bench, regardless of their doubts about its correctness.

Headnote:
Section 10 - Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 - The court held that a decision of a Constitution Bench of the Court binds a Bench of two learned Judges and judicial discipline obliges them to follow it, regardless of their doubts about its correctness.
Fact of the Case:

The matter came before the court as two learned judges doubted the correctness of the scope attributed to Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 in a previous Constitution Bench Judgment.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the decision of a Constitution Bench binds a Bench of two learned Judges and judicial discipline obliges them to follow it, regardless of their doubts about its correctness.
Issues: The issue was whether the Bench of two learned judges should follow the decision of a Constitution Bench despite their doubts about its correctness.
Ratio Decidendi: The ratio decidendi was that judicial discipline obliges a Bench of two learned judges to follow the decision of a Constitution Bench, and they could have ordered that the matter be heard by a Bench of three learned judges if they had doubts.
Final Decision: The matter was directed to be heard and decided by a Bench of two learned judges, following the decision of the Constitution Bench.

Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the case Bharat Petroleum Corporation vs. Mumbai Shramik Sangha:

The matter was referred to a Constitution Bench on 13th January, 1998, because two learned judges doubted the correctness of the scope attributed to Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 in the previous Gammon (India) Ltd. v. Union of India judgment. (!)
The Court held that a decision of a Constitution Bench binds a Bench of two learned judges and judicial discipline obliges them to follow it, regardless of their doubts about its correctness. (!)
At the most, the doubting judges could have ordered the matter to be heard by a Bench of three learned judges. (!)
Accordingly, the matter was directed to be heard and decided by a Bench of two learned judges. (!)

Judgment

S. P. Bharucha, JJ.

( 1 ) THE order of reference to a Constitution bench is dated 13th January, 1998. Two learned judges of this Court have doubted the correctness of the scope attributed to Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) act, 1970 in the Constitution Bench Judgment in Gammon (India) Ltd. v. Union of India. This is how the matter comes before us.

( 2 ) WE are of the view that a decision of a constitution Bench of this Court binds a Bench of two learned Judges of this Court and that judicial discipline obliges them to follow it, regardless of their doubts about its correctness. At the most, they could have ordered that the matter be heard by a Bench of three learned judges.

( 3 ) ACCORDINGLY, this matter shall now be heard and decided by a Bench of two learned judges.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2001 Supreme(SC) 766

SUPREME COURT OF INDIABHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION Versus Mumbai Shramik SanghaDecided on April 25, 2001

Judicial discipline obliges a Bench of two learned judges to follow the decision of a Constitution Bench, regardless of their doubts about its correctness.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION
Versus
Mumbai Shramik Sangha
Decided on April 25, 2001