The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, the authority of the State Government to grant interim relief, and the role of the Chief Minister in decision-making.

( 1 ) THE State Government has preferred these intra-Court appeals against the order passed by the learned Single Judge (BPL Group of companies Karmikara Sangha, Bangalore v State of Karnataka and others) directing the State Government to pass orders granting interim reliefs to the members of the respondent-Workers Union under Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the "act"), in terms of the recommendations made by the Labour Commissioner and initially approved by the Minister in charge of Labour Department, by ignoring the order of the Chief Minister, who, on review of the entire facts and consulting all concerned, opined that in the facts of the case, instead of granting interim relief by the Government, this point as well be referred to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 (1) (d) of the Act.

( 2 ) THE basic facts to be taken note of are quite short. The members of the respondent-workers union are employed in 12 corporate bodies, which for the sake of convenience are called "bpl Group of Companies". These workmen went on strike on 19-11-1998 in order to press their charter of demands. But since the management did not concede to their demands after failure of conciliation proceedings, the disputes reached state Government for referring to the Industrial Tribunal.

( 3 ) THE Government by its order dated 25-2-1999 (Annexure-B) passed under Section 10 (l) (d) of the Act referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore. The disputes so referred were registered by the Tribunal on 9-3-1999 being IDs 17 to 28 of 1999. Both the parties appeared before the Tribunal in July 1999. The adjudicatory process is still pending.

( 4 ) THE respondent-workers union while requesting the State Government for referring the dispute to the Tribunal also wanted from the government to grant interim relief in terms of Section 10-B of the Act. But the Government instead of granting any interim relief referred this issue as well to the Tribunal by formulating one of the points of dispute being "whether the workmen are entitled for interim relief?"

( 5 ) THE respondent-workers union being aggrieved by the order of the government, approached this Court by filing writ petitions seeking directions against the Government to grant interim relief under Section 10-B of the Act. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge quashed a part of the order of reference (Annexure-B) to the extent it related to entitlement of interim relief with a direction to the Government to pass orders granting interim relief as already noticed above.

( 6 ) KEEPING in view the findings and directions given by the learned single Judge, four material questions fall for our consideration, namely, (I) Whether, at the time of or after making a reference of an industrial dispute under Section 10 (1) of the Act, it is incumbent on the part of the Government to pass orders in terms of Section 10-B of the Act? (II) Whether the powers conferred under Section 10-B of the Act can be exercised by the State Government even during the pendency of adjudication of a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal? (III) Whether the order to be passed under Section 10-B of the Act is to be based on its objective or subjective satisfaction and as to whether it should be preceded by an opportunity of hearing to be granted to the workmen as well the management? (IV) Whether, under the Karnataka Government (Transaction of Business) Rules, 1977 (in short the 'business Rules'), framed under clauses (2) and (3) of Article 166 of the Constitution of India, the decision, with regard to grant of interim relief in terms of section 10-B of the Act, of the Minister for Labour is final and the chief Minister has no power to interfere with it?

( 7 ) RE: Question Nos. (i), (ii) and (iii ). For answering the first three questions, it is necessary first to refer Section 10-B of the Act, as inserted by Karnataka Act 5 of 1988, which reads as under. "10-B. P