Judgment

VAIDIALINGAM, J.: In this appeal by special leave, the appellant challenges the order of the Allahabad High Court dated May 11, 1967 dismissing Civil Miscelleneous Writ Petition No. 1647 of 1967.

2. The facts leading up to the filing of the said writ petition by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution may be briefly stated. The appellant is an existing company under the Companies Act, 1956, and has its registered office at Calcutta. The company was and is being managed by Martin Burn Ltd., Secretaries and Treasurers. The Company carries on the business of generation, distribution and supply of electricity within its licensed area in the city of Agra and its environs in the State of Uttar Pradesh. On a reference made by the Government of Uttar Pradesh regarding a dispute that had arisen between the electricity undertakings managed by Martin Burn Ltd., of which the appellant was one, and their workmen about the demand of the workmen for supply of uniforms, free of charge the Chairman, Martin Electricity Supply Company Adjudication Board made an award on February 20, 1947 in and by which certain types of workmen were directed to be supplied with uniforms. The said award remained operative till April 15, 1950 on which date it was terminated. Though the award had been terminated, the appellant continued practice of supplying uniforms to its workmen. Subsequently, again, a dispute was raised by the employees of the electricity undertakings managed by Martin Burn Ltd., regarding the supply of uniforms to some categories of workers. The said dispute was referred by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, by order dated March 15, 1951, for adjudication to the State Industrial Tribunal, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad. The said Industrial Tribunal passed an award dated November 29, 1952 holding that the same categories of workmen to whom uniforms had to be supplied as per the award dated February 20, 1947 were entitled to be supplied with uniforms. Though this award remained in operation only for a period of one year, the appellant continued to supply uniforms till 1953 after which year the supply of uniforms was discontinued. Nevertheless, the appellant again resumed supplying uniforms from May 1961.

3. On December 31, 1961 twenty-three employees of the appellant, including the second respondent herein filed a joint petition before the Labour Court, Meerut, under Section 6-H (2) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming that they were entitled to recover the money equivalent to the cost of uniforms which had not been supplied to them during the period 1954 to 1960. The said petition was numbered as Case No. 1 of 1962. According to these employees, the employer had failed to supply them uniforms which they were entitled to get and in consequence of such failure the workmen had been put to expense by purchase of clothes to be used while rendering service in the company. They claimed that the benefits which they were entitled to get should be computed in terms of money to enable them to recover the cost of uniforms from the appellant. The appellant filed a written statement on January 27, 1962 disputing the claim of the workmen and denying its liability to either supply uniforms or pay the money value of the same.

4. On February 22, 1964 the application filed by the workmen was taken up by the Labour Court for hearing, but as none appeared on behalf of the workmen who were the applicants when the case was called on for hearing, the Labour Court, Meerut, dismissed the application for non-prosecution. The actual order passed by the Labour Court was as follows:

"Case called on for hearing. No one is present on behalf of the applicant, nor any request for adjournment has been received.

The application is dismissed as not having been prosecuted. No order as to costs".

5. On or about January 1, 1965 seven employees of the appellant, including the second respondent herein, filed seven separa