JUDGMENT :

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J:

1. The present batch of writ applications concerns challenge to the orders passed by the Tribunals/Labour Courts constituted under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), whereby the Tribunals/Labour Courts have been, inter alia, pleased to not only entertain proceedings but have also proceeded to hear out matters, by exercising jurisdiction under section 2A(2) of the said Act, notwithstanding the repeal of the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the “Amendment Act of 2010”) as a whole, by the Repeal and Amendment Act of 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the “Repealing Act”).

2. Since all the aforesaid applications raise a common question, as regards the legality and validity of proceedings under section 2A (2) of the said Act, the hearing of all the aforesaid applications is taken up together.

3. It appears that there are two sets of contenders, one set of parties who are mostly representing the employers, claim, consequent upon repeal of the Amendment Act of 2010, as a whole, section 2A(2) of the said Act, does not survive in the statute book, for the Tribunals/Labour Courts, to exercise jurisdiction. On the other hand, the other set of parties who are primarily the employees/ workman claim, notwithstanding repeal of the Amendment Act of 2010 the provisions of section 2A (2) of the Amendment Act of 2010, continue to survive in the statute book and there is no irregularity on the part of the learned Labour Courts/Industrial Tribunals, assuming jurisdiction under section 2A(2) of this said Act.

4. In most of the cases the learned Labour Court/tribunals have held, notwithstanding the repeal of the Amendment Act, of 2010 the learned Labour Courts/Industrial Tribunals are competent to exercise jurisdiction under section 2A(2) of the said Act. In one of the matter (being WPA 1891 of 2021), the First Industrial Tribunal Kolkata, West Bengal, has, however, been pleased to uphold the objection as to the maintainability of the application filed under section 2A(2) of the said Act, consequent upon the Repealing Act, being notified.

5. Challenging the aforesaid orders, the parties have moved this Hon’ble Court, in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

6. For convenience, this court has permitted the parties who, inter alia, contend that notwithstanding the repeal of the Amendment Act of 2010, the provisions inserted by the said Amendment Act of 2010 continues to survive in the principal act, to argue first.

7. The learned Advocates representing the workman, by referring to the provisions of the Amendment Act of 2010, submits that the said Amendment Act of 2010, which was notified in the Gazette of India on 19th August, 2010, consequent upon publication of notification, as aforesaid, the Amendment Act of 2010 had been incorporated in the principal Act. In terms of the provisions contained in Section 3 of the Amendment Act of 2010, section 2A of the principal Act had been re-numbered, as sub-section (1) thereof and after sub-section (1) so renumbered, sub-section 2 had been inserted. On the said section 2A(2) being inserted, the same has become incorporated in the statute book and despite the Repealing Act being notified, whereby the whole of the aforesaid Amendment Act of 2010 has been repealed, the said section 2A(2) continues to remain in the statute book, as if the same has not been repealed. By referring to Section 4 of the Repealing Act, it is submitted that notwithstanding the Legislature purporting to repeal the Amendment Act of 2010, the Legislature, by incorporating Section 4 in the Repealing Act, has provided for a saving clause, so as to save the said section 2A(2) in the principal Act.

8. The Repealing Act is a Central Act and Section 6A of the General Clauses Act, 1897, protects the continuation of the amended provision in the principal Act, notwithstanding such repeal. Thus, by referring to section 6A of