The jurisdiction of an Industrial Tribunal is confined to the terms of reference provided by the government, excluding unrelated or independent issues.

JUDGMENT :

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned senior advocate Mr.K.M.Patel with learned advocate Mr.Dilip Rana waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 and 3.

2. Present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India thereby challenging the order passed by the learned Tribunal at Vadodara dated 15.09.2023 passed below Exh.33 in Reference (I.T.) No.42 of 2018 challenging the application filed for amendment of statement of claim. This petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 05.08.2024, however, while dismissing the petition, the observation was made that it is open for the petitioner to take all the contention before the learned Tribunal at the time of arguments and the learned Industrial Tribunal shall consider the same in accordance with law and the observation made by the learned Tribunal will not come in the way of petitioner at the time of arguments. Challenging the said order dated 24.09.2024, in intra court appeal filed by both the parties, this Court has remanded the matter back to this Court by allowing the appeal being Letters Patent Appeal No.1374 of 2024 and No.1340 of 2024 directing the learned Single Judge to decide the matter afresh and the petition is heard thereafter, by this Court at length.

3. Gist of the case is that the petitioner Union raised a demand claiming the strength of employees more than 100, alleging the violation of provision under Chapter V-B. The respondent No.3 has filed the written statement contending that the strength of workman which is alleged to have been 125 is not correct, out of the said 125 workmen, 34 employees are employees of the respondent No.2 Unit, which is separate and independent identity. During the course of adjudication of the reference, an application was preferred by the petitioner Union seeking production of the documents to establish the violation of provision under Chapter V-B. The said application was allowed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 06.08.2019 and was subject matter of challenge before this Court in Special Civil Application No.22274 of 2019 which came to be allowed vide order dated 15.06.2022 setting aside the order dated 06.08.2019 passed by the learned Tribunal. The order passed in the Writ petition was further challenged in the intra court appeal by filing Letters Patent Appeal No.977 of 2022 wherein, consensus order was passed by this Court on 19.12.2022 recording the consent of the respondent No.3 to produce the statement showing the names, designation and salary of the employees named in Annexure-B of the written statement and last pay slip of 2007.

3.1. On being complied with the observations made in the intra court appeal, the list of the documents were produced below Exh.29 on 30.12.2022. The petitioner Union, on receiving the documents, more particularly the pay slip of 34 workman showing the place of work as Vejalpur at Maharashtra in July, 2017 which is before the date of closure i.e. 05.08.2017 has filed the application on 17.02.2023 seeking amendment in the statement of claim alleging the rationalization and retrenchment in violation of section 9(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). The said application came to be rejected by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 15.09.2023 below Exh.33 which is subject matter of challenge before this Court.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Ishan Joshi for the petitioner and learned senior advocate Mr.K.M.Patel with learned advocate Mr.Dilip Rana for respondent No.2 and though Notice is s