D. P. MOHAPATRA, CJ.

( 1 ) THE learned single Judge, before whom the case was initially laid, referred the following 2 questions for consideration by a larger Bench:

1. Whether the Labour Court/industrial Tribunal have any statutory or legal obligation to decide any issue as preliminary issue while adjudicating an Industrial dispute in accordance with procedure provided under Rules framed under U. P. Industrial Disputes Act?

2 Whether the High Court can in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution mandate a Court or Tribunal to follow a procedure contrary to statutory Rules? when the case was listed before a Division Bench, the Bench took the view that the matter should be placed before a Full Bench for deciding the questions referred by the learned single judge. That is how the case has been listed before this Full Bench for decision on the aforementioned questions.

( 2 ) SHORTLY stated, the question that falls for determination is whether in a case where the validity of an order of dismissal, discharge, removal or termination of service is referred to the Industrial tribunal or Labour Court for adjudication, the management can insist on the issue regarding legality of the domestic enquiry conducted by the management to be decided as a preliminary issue and thereafter to decide whether it will adduce evidence before the Industrial Tribunal or labour Court to prove the charges. Experience shows that in such cases the management in its written statement pleads in favour of summary dismissal of the case on the ground that the order of dismissal, removal or termination was preceded by a valid domestic enquiry held in accordance with the procedure laid down in the service rules or standing order and therefore, the industrial Tribunal/labour Court should decline to interfere in the matter. in the pleadings the management also takes an alternative stand to establish the charges before the Industrial tribunal or Labour Court. The question is whether in such cases the Management is entitled as of right to have the issue of legality of the domestic enquiry decided as a preliminary issue or the industrial Tribunal or Labour Court may pass an order to take up all the issues together and decide the entire case at a time. The difference in following the two procedures will be that the battle will be fought piecemeal, first on the issue of legality and validity of the domestic enquiry and thereafter on the issue of Justifiability or otherwise of the charges. If necessary. It is often contended on behalf of the management in such cases that it Js entitled to have the decision of the Industrial Tribunal/labour Court on the preliminary issue before it can be called upon to decide whether to adduce evidence to establish the charges before the Industrial Tribunal/labour court.

( 3 ) BEFORE discussing the point on merit, it will be convenient to notice the relevant statutory provisions in the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (U. P. Act No XXVIII of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the U. P. Act) and the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act ). Section 6 of the U. P. Act reads as follows :

"6 Awards and action to be taken thereon.-- (1) Where an Industrial dispute has been referred to a Labour Court or Tribunal for adjudication, it shall hold its proceedings expeditiously and shall as soon as it is practicable on the conclusion thereof, submit its award to the State Government.

(2) The award of a Labour Court or Tribunal shall be in writing and shall be signed by Its presiding Officer. (2a) An award in an Industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman may direct the setting aside of the discharge or dismissal and reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, If any, as the authority making the award may think fit, or granting such other relief to the workman, including the substitution of any lesser punishment for discharge or d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document