Section 18(3)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 empowers the Labour Court to implead any party as an employer, including his heirs, successors, and assigns in respect of the establishment to which the dispute relates.

JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. Since in this bunch of writ petitions common question of law and fact has been raised, therefore, they are heard together and decided by this common order. As a leading case, the facts of SBCWP No. 12663 of 2018 are taken note of for the convenience.

2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition praying for the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the record of the learned Trib. may kindly be called and examined and petition filed by the Petitioner Company may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 28.2.2018 may kindly be quashed and set aside and if any further proceeding in pursuance of the said order is taken same may kindly be also quashed and set aside. Any other Order/direction which is in the interest of the Petitioner and the Hon'ble High Court may think fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly also be passed."

3. The petitioner-M/s. Arafat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. being a registered company has filed these writ petitions challenging the order of the learned Labour Court impleading the petitioner as a party to the ongoing industrial dispute.

4. Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A.K. Bhandari, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Anurag Agarwal, Advocate, submits that the petitioner cannot be impleaded as a party in the ongoing industrial dispute before the Labour Court as the petitioner was no where in the picture when the reference in question was made by the State Government on 30.05.1994. Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the terms of the reference, which reads as follows:

^^D;k v/;{k@egkea=h] tsŒdsŒ LVkQ ,lksfl;s'ku dksVk }kjk ÁLrqr ekax i= fnukad 20-07-1992 ftldh Áfr layXu gSA mBkbZ xbZ ekaxs mfpr vkSj oS/k gS \ ;fn gka rks laLFkku esa dk;Zjr DydlZ ,oa lqijokbZtjh dSMj ds Jfed ÁcU/kd tsŒdsŒ Vk;j dkMZ ,ŒVhŒlhŒ xzqi dksVk ls D;k jkgr ÁkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gS\**

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that terms of reference makes it categorically clear that the rights were being agitated only against J.K. Tyre Cord (ATC Group), Kota. Counsel for the petitioner further drew the attention of this Court to the amendment made in the reference on 25.08.1995 whereby terminology of Sahayak Adhikari, Adhikari Senior Adhikari Shreni Ke Karmchari was inducted in between the Shramik and the Prabandhak. Counsel for the petitioner to fortify his submissions has taken this Court to the tripartite agreement between the union - M/s. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and M/s. Arafat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. - petitioner whereby petitioner has been absolved of its liability against the worker similarly situated as the respondent in question. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the definition of 'cut of dates' in agreement, which reads as follows:

"Cut-Off Dates - The parties agree that the cutoff dates for computation and calculation of the dues and compensation payable to employees of PSG groups will be 11th September, 1997 and to the employees of ATC will be 31st July, 1997. These cut-off dates have been arrived at an amicable understanding and to ensure that henceforth there shall be no dispute on these cut-off dates."

6. Counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court to the definition of labour liabilities in agreement, which also reads as follows:

"Labour Liabilities" shall mean and include all amounts due and payable to the workmen and employees by JKSL as on the dates of cessation of operations of the ATC and PSG units as on cut-off dates and also include the retired/superannuated/suspended/ dismissed/ terminated/deceased workmen and obligations arising out of claims suits/plaints etc filed by the workmen with respect to their dues at the Kota Complex including those at the SPRC. The liabilities include and cover all claims and dues, compensation under all heads whatsoever as recorded in Annexure-B."

7. Counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court to the terms and cond