The Government's opinion on the existence or apprehension of an industrial dispute is an administrative act and not subject to judicial review.

J.B. Koshy, J.

Petitioner challenges Ext. P1 award of the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam. Denial of employment of 7 workers were referred for adjudication. Management raised a preliminary objection stating that there is no valid industrial dispute as no charter of demands were placed before the Management. Since there is demand by union and denial by the workman there is no industrial dispute. Tribunal accepted the above. Tribunal relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Sindhu re-settlement Corporation Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal of Gujarat & Ors. (AIR 1968 SO 529). A constitutional Bench of Supreme Court in State of Madras v. C.P. Sarathy (1953 (I) LLJ 174 SC ) formulated four propositions:

(i) The Government should satisfy itself on the facts and circumstances brought to its notice in its subjective opinion that an'industrial dispute' exists or is 'apprehended',

(ii) the factual existence of a dispute or its apprehension and the expediency of making reference matters entirely for the Government to decide;

(iii) the order making a reference is an administrative act and it is nota judicial or a quasi-judicial act;

(iv) the order of reference passed by the Government cannot be examined by the High Court in its jurisdiction under Art.226 of the Constitution to see if the Government had material before it to support the conclusion that the dispute existed or was apprehended.

Though these propositions were based on the unamended Act, which did not contain the words "where the appropriate Government is of opinion", the Court implied the formation of "subjective opinion" by the appropriate Government, in the words "if any industrial dispute exists or is apprehended".

2. In Western India Match Co. v. Western India Match Co. Workers Union (1970 (II) LLJ 256) Supreme Court held that Government without going into the merit of the case if it is of the opinion that there is an industrial dispute, its function is only to refer the matter with the Tribunal. S.10(1) enables the appropriate Government to make reference of an industrial dispute which exists or is apprehended 'at any time' between the parties mentioned in the Section. How, and in what manner, or through what machinery, the Government is appraised of the dispute is not relevant. In Western India Match Co. Ltd. v. Western India Match Co. Workers Union (1970 (II) LLJ 256) Supreme Court observed as follows:

"Ordinarily the question of making a reference would arise after conciliation proceedings have been gone through and the conciliation officer has made a failure report. But the Government need not wait until such a procedure has been completed."

Therefore, it is clear that if the apprehension of an industrial dispute, it can be referred to adjudication even without a conciliation proceedings and even without a specific demand and the denial in making of an order of reference.

3. In Pradip Lamp Works, Patna & Workers of Pradip Lamp Works & Ann (1970 (I) LLJ 507) it was held by the Supreme Court that when there was a intended strike there is an 'apprehended' industrial dispute. Order of reference is not usually amenable to judicial review by this Court also. In certain circumstances it may be amenable to judicial review (See Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. S.D. Agarwall & Ann (AIR 1969 SC 707 at page 715), Shambu Nath Goyal v. Bank o fBaroda, Jullundur (1978 (I) LLJ 484) and Sindhu Resettlement Corporation Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal of Gujarat (1968 (I) LLJ 834). Judicial review may be possible in certain circumstances like where it is patent that referring government is not "appropriate Government" where there is no industrial dispute at all, or the activity is not an industry or reference is contradictory to law or disputes are admittedly covered by a settlement of previous award. Even in such cases if matters are disputed it is proper to file objection before the Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court and after adducing evidence of these points if the tribunal come to the conclus