Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : N.KUMARAYYA, P.CHANDRA REDDY
Employers of Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd., Madras - Appellant
Versus
Labour Court, A.P., Hyderabad. - Respondent
Decided On : 02-07-62
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 - SECTION 2(K) - ESPOUSAL OF INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE BY UNION - REQUIREMENTS - COMMUNITY OF INTEREST - DIRECT OR SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN EMPLOYMENT OR CONDITIONS OF LABOUR OF AGGRIEVED WORKMEN - MERE WRITING OF LETTERS BY OTHER WORKMEN TO UNION PLEDGING SUPPORT NOT SUFFICIENT - INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE NOT CONVERTED INTO INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a newspaper company, dismissed two working journalists from its Hyderabad branch for misconduct and gross negligence of duties. The Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists, of which the dismissed journalists were members, espoused their cause and took steps to secure redressal of their grievances. The Government referred the matter to the Labour Court for adjudication. The Labour Court overruled the appellant's objection to its jurisdiction, holding that the dispute was an industrial dispute since it was espoused by the Union. The appellant challenged this order in the High Court, which dismissed the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court erred in holding that the dispute was an industrial dispute. The Andhra Pradesh Union, not being a union of the employees of the appellant, could not take up the cause of the dismissed journalists so as to convert the individual dispute into an industrial dispute. The mere writing of letters by the other two workmen to the Union pledging support was not sufficient to constitute an espousal of the dispute by them.
Issues: Whether the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists, not being a union of the employees of the appellant, could espouse the cause of the dismissed journalists so as to convert the individual dispute into an industrial dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: An individual dispute can be converted into an industrial dispute only if it is espoused by a number of workmen or by a union representing them. The union or workmen espousing the dispute must have a direct or substantial interest in the employment or conditions of labour of the aggrieved workmen. The Andhra Pradesh Union, not being a union of the appellant's employees, did not have a direct or substantial interest in the employment or conditions of labour of the dismissed journalists. Therefore, the Union could not espouse the dispute and convert it into an industrial dispute.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed and the order of the Labour Court was quashed.
( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Basi Reddy, J. refusing to remove an order of the Labour Court, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad on certiorari.
( 2 ) THE facts material for the purpose of this enquiry are shortly these. The appellant i. e. , Messrs. Express Newspapers (Private) Limited is a company incorporated under Indian Companies Act and has its head office at Madras. At the material time, it had a branch at Hyderabad with five employees, a branch manager, two working journalists, a staff reporter and a correspondent, who are respondents 2 and 3 in this appeal, a teleprinter operator and an attender. The appellant dismissed the two respondents from service on 28-6-1959 for misconduct and gross negligence of duties. While there was a Union of the appellants workmen in Madras known as the Express Newspapers Employees Union, there was no such union of the workmen of the appellants establishment at Hyderabad. Respondents 2 and 3 were not members of the Madras Union but were members of the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists which had" its registered office at Hyderabad. Respondents 2 and 3 wrote to the General Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists (which will hereinafter be referred to as the Andhra Pradesh Union) apprising him of their dismissal on 28-6-1959 by the management of the Express Newspapers Limited and complaining that their dismissal was wrongful and vindictive and was an act of victimisation for their trade union activities and requesting him to convene a meeting of the general body of the Andhra Pradesh Union to espouse their cause and to secure the redressal of their grievances. Meanwhile, the other two employees of the appellant addressed letters to the Andhra Pradesh Union promising their co-operation to the Union in any steps which the Union might take in the matter of obtaining the redressal of the grievances of respondents 2 and 3. At a meeting of the general body of the Andhra Pradesh Union held on 19/07/1959, a resolution was passed condemning the action of the management of the Express Newspapers (private) Limited in illegally and improperly dismissing respondents 2 and 3. By the same resolution it was decided that the Union should sponsor the cause of respondents 2 and 3 and take necessary steps to secure redressal of their grievances by moving the concerned authorities. Then the Union wrote to the appellant protesting against the dismissal of respondents z and 3 to which the latter sent a reply justifying their action. Thereafter, the Union started proceedings before the Conciliation Officer, Department of Labour, Government of Andhra Pradesh. The Conciliation proceedings however did not bear fruit. Ultimately, the Government of Andhra Pradesh referred the following matters for adjudication to the Labour Court, Hyderabad : "whether the dismissal of the following working journalists is justified : 1. Sri K. Sampath, Staff Reporter; and 2. T. V. Krishna, Correspondent. If not, to what relief are they entitled?"
( 3 ) WHEN the matter went up before the Labour Court the appellant questioned its jurisdiction to entertain the reference, inter alia, on the ground that the dispute was only an individual dispute and not an industrial dispute within the terms of Section 2 (k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) inasmuch as it was not sponsored by a substantial section of the entire establishment of the appellants company or a recognised part of the establishment thereof or by a Union of the Workmen of the company. It is not necessary to refer to other grounds of challenge as they are not pressed before us. The Labour Court overruled this objection as in its view the cause of the two working journalists was espoused by the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists of which they were admittedly members and which was a trade Union representative of working journalists of Andhra Pradesh, and that as the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.