1. Short question emerging for consideration in the above Original Petitions, all of them filed by the same petitioner, a banking company having operation in more than one State, is over the jurisdiction of Labour Court competent to entertain labour disputes in relation to that banking company falling under section 33C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, for short the Act. In respect of petitioner banking company which is the appropriate Government under the aforesaid sub section of the Act, whether it is the Central Government or State Government, is the question posed for consideration to determine the competent Labour Court having jurisdiction to entertain the claim raised under Section 33C(2) of the Act.

2. Though notice was ordered to the respondents, none of them, after service, have responded.

3. Some employees of petitioner banking company have raised claims for money or benefit which is capable of being computed in terms of money from the employer moving applications under section 33C(2) of the Act before the Labour Court, Kannur. Petitioner banking company asserts of having operations in more than one State, and not confined to State of Kerala alone. So much, so labour dispute in relation to petitioner banking company falling under Section 33C(2) of the Act can be entertained and decided only by the Labour Court specified by the Central Government, is the case of petitioner to challenge the entertainability of the claim applications moved by its employees before the Labour Court, which have been taken on file by that court for inquiry.

4. Sub section (2) of Section 33C of the Act reads thus:-

33C. Recovery of money due from an employee—

(1) ………

(2) Where any workman is entitled to receive from the employer any money or any benefit which is capable of being computed in terms of money and if any question arises as to the amount of money due or as to the amount at which such benefit should be computed, I then the question may, subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, be decided by such Labour Court as may be specified in this behalf by the appropriate Government (within a period not exceeding three months).

Provided ………… (rest not required and hence omitted).

The above section confers a valuable right and enables a workman entitled to receive from the employer any money or any benefit which is capable of being computed in terms of money moving an application before Labour Court specified by the appropriate government, and if any question arises as to the amount of money at which such benefit should be computed, it has to be decided by that Labour Court. According to petitioner in respect of petitioner banking company appropriate government is the Central Government. Notification issued by the Central Government specifying the Labour Court, Ernakulam constituted under section 7 of the Act empowering that court to exercise the powers conferred by sub section (2) of Section 33 of the Act has been made available for my perusal by the learned counsel for petitioner. That Notification reads thus:-

“S.O.1167—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub section (2) of Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby specifies the Labour Court, Ernakulam, constituted under section 7 of the said Act by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour No.A-11016/3/2003-CLS-II, dated 12.2.2004 as the Labour Court which shall determine the amount at which any benefit referred to in that sub section would be computed in terms of money in relation to workmen employed in any industry in the State of Kerala and the Union Territory of Lakshdweep in respect of which the Central Government is the appropriate Government.”

Labour Court constituted under section 7 of the act by the Central Government has been specified by the Central Government to decide labour disputes under section 33C (2) of the Act which fall within its ambit and jurisdiction, is spell ou