V. P. MOHAN KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner challenges the validity of Annexure-K order passed by the Government. The facts in this case are as follows:

( 2 ) THE petitioner is a Cement Factory, employing more than 450 workers. There are two units. On certain alleged misconduct committed by the 4th respondent, he was proceeded against, which resulted in the workers launching a strike. The dispute regarding the disciplinary action taken against the 4th respondent is pending adjudication before the Labour Court, evidenced by Annexure-J. At this stage, the Government has passed Annexure-K order calling upon the Management to pay 75 per cent of the wages to the workers. This order has been issued in exercise of the power under Section 10-B of the industrial Disputes Act. The challenge against the said order is essentially on the allegation that this order having been passed without hearing the petitioner. The Management contends that before the issuance of Annexure-K order, the petitioner ought to have been heard and only after hearing it, an order could have been passed. According to the Management, the order has civil consequence and, therefore, whenever an order having civil consequenc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document