Judgment

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J.- Special leave is granted.

2. This appeal from an order of the Patna High Court raises an important question as to the scope of Section 33-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act).

3. The facts can be quite shortly stated: The appellant-company is mainly engaged in construction of coal washeries on contract basis in different collieries and also doing allied and incidental work. Shivaji Prasad Sinha - respondent 4 was a Senior Supervisor in the companys establishment at Dhanbad. It is said that he was caught red-handed when carrying 55 pieces of electromagnetic clutch plates kept concealed in the tool box of his scooter. The management held domestic enquiry into the incident and found him guilty of committing theft. He was accordingly dismissed from service. The dispute arising therefrom was referred under Section 10(1)(c) of the Act to Labour Court, Dhanbad for adjudication. The Labour Court registered the case as Reference Case No. 4 of 1988 and issued notice to the parties. The parties entered appearance and filed their respective pleadings. When the matter was thus pending consideration the respondent seems to have written to the government stating that it would be difficult for him to attend the Labour Court, Dhanbad since he has been residing at Hajipur and it would be convenient for him if the case is transferred to Labour Court, Patna. That application was made without intimation to the management. The government however, has acceded to the request of the respondent and without opportunity to the management transferred the case to Labour Court, Patna. The notification issued in that regard reads as follows:

"Notification Patna dated August 8, 1988

S.O. In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 33-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Governor of Bihar after careful consideration of the application of the petitioner Shri Shivajee Prasad Sinha wherein he has prayed for the transfer of adjudication proceedings to Patna keeping in view to the difficulties expressed by him to attend the Labour Court, Dhanbad, regularly due to his residence at Majipur is pleased to withdraw the proceeding shown in Annexure A pending before Labour Court, Dhanbad and transfer the said proceeding to the Labour Court, Patna for speedy disposal for the stage at which the case is transferred."

4. The management moved the High Court by way of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to have the notification quashed. The High Court did not agree and summarily dismissed the writ petition with an observation:

"Since no prejudice is being caused to the petitioner and no allegation of mala fide has been made against the Presiding Officer, Patna, we are not inclined to interfere with the order under challenge.

This application is dismissed."

5. The management in the appeal challenges the government notification withdrawing and transferring the pending case from the Labour Court, Dhanbad to Labour Court, Patna.

6. Since the impugned notification has been issued under Section 33-B of the Act, we may for immediate reference set out that section.

Omitting immaterial words, it is in these terms:

"33-B. Power to transfer certain proceedings.- (1) The appropriate government may, by order in writing and for reasons to be stated therein, withdraw any proceeding under this Act pending before a Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal and transfer the same to another Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be, for the disposal of the proceeding and the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal to which the proceeding is so transferred may, subject to special directions in the order of transfer, proceed either de novo or from the stage at which it was so transferred."

7. Section 33-B provides power to the appropriate government to withdraw any proceedings pending before a Labour Court or Tribunal and transfer it for disposal to another Labour Court or Tribunal.