The jurisdiction of an Industrial Tribunal to deal with an application for approval of penal action taken by an employer against an employee terminates after the Tribunal has made its award on the industrial dispute referred to it.

ORDER : The point for my consideration in this Rule is short but interesting. That point is whether an Industrial Tribunal retains its jurisdiction to deal with an application for approval of penal action taken by an employer against an employee after the Tribunal has made its award on the industrial dispute referred to it. The provision of law, that is relevant for consideration in this context, is S. 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act to which I shall refer later on.

2. The circumstances in which the point arises for my consideration are hereinafter stated in brief. The petitioner company is a manufacturing concern and employs a large number of workmen. The company had dismissed a workman of the name of Satya Ranjan Banerjee for absenteeism. That dismissal gave rise to an industrial dispute, which was referred by the respondent State Government to the Seventh Industrial Tribunal on October 26, 1961, for adjudication. While that reference was pending, the petitioner company dismissed the second, third and fourth respondents workmen for misconduct. Since the workmen were dismissed during the pendency of a proceeding before an Industrial Tribunal, the petitioner company made an application before the Tribunal, on March 20, 1962, for approval of the action taken against the three workmen, under the provisions of S. 33(2)(b) proviso of the Industrial Disputes Act. Before that application was disposed of, the Tribunal made its award on the main reference and the award was published in the Calcutta Gazette on September 7, 1962.

3. On March 15, 1963, the petitioner company filed an application before the Tribunal taking up the stand that the Tribunal had no further jurisdiction to deal with the application made under S. 33(2)(b) proviso. The material portion of the said application reads as follows :

"(2) The industrial dispute between the company and the Union has since been disposed of by this Hon'ble Tribunal by its award dated 10th August 1963 (Ext. A) and the said award has been published by the Government of West Bengal. Labour Department, under their Order No. 3743-TR-11L-233 (B)/61 dated the 24th August 1962 (Ext B). It has been published in the Calcutta Gazette Extraordinary dated 7th September 1962.

(3) The company respectfully submits that this Hon'ble Tribunal having given its award in the industrial dispute referred to it by the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department, the proceedings before the Tribunal should be deemed to have been concluded under S. 20(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the pendency of proceedings in regard to this dispute which had given this Hon'ble Tribunal the jurisdiction to consider the company's application under Section 33(2)(b) of the said Act no longer exists. In the circumstances the company submits that the Hon'ble Tribunal has no jurisdiction to dispose of the application filed before it under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act on 20th March 1962."

4. By an order dated May 2, 1963, the Tribunal rejected the application and fixed a date of hearing of the application for approval. The reasons which weighed with the Tribunal are hereinafter stated :

"In my view, the contentions raised by the company to the effect that this Tribunal has lost all jurisdiction in regard to the present application under the proviso to S. 33(2)(b) simply because the adjudication proceedings in regard to the main dispute with reference to which the present application was made have been concluded and this Tribunal has become functus officio with regard to the said dispute is not tenable and acceptable. This contention proceeds upon the assumption that the Tribunal's jurisdiction in regard to the present application is absolutely dependent upon and co-extensive with the jurisdiction in regard to the main dispute. This assumption is not correct. The main dispute which was under adjudication when the dismissal of the employees covered by the present application was made provided the occasion