1. Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by order dated 20.7.2018(Annexure P-4) by which Labour Commissioner, M.P., Indore in exercise of powers under section 10 (1) of Industrial Disputes act, 1947 (hereinafter in short I.D. Act) has referred an industrial dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, M.P., Indore for adjudication.

2. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act having its 6 manufacturing units situated at Pithampur. Petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of yarn, weaving, garments, stitching, hosiery material, etc. According to the petitioner, textile industries are not performing well globally as well as in India because of overall recession in the business world. Even in Pithampur Industrial Area, some of the industries have stopped their production activities for want of orders. Petitioner was also not in a position to provide the work to almost 600 workers in all the six units, but somehow managed to pay the minimum wages as prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act. There was no industrial dispute between the management and the employees/workmen.

3. For the first time, in the month of March, 2018, one Munnalal Sahni claiming himself to be a District President Mazdoor Sabha and member of Samajwadi Party submitted an application dated 13.3.2018 raising various demands for the workers working in the units of the petitioner. He also made a complaint to the Labour Department in which the cognizance was taken and thereafter petitioner was directed to appear on 27.3.2018 before labour Officer. In response to the aforesaid notice, representative of the petitioner/management appeared and submitted that no such trade union affiliated with Samajwadi Party is operating in any of their establishment. It has also been submitted that handful terminated employees backed by political party are creating problems in smooth functioning of the plant. Despite objection taken about the maintainability of the dispute , demands made by political party and 16 employees, labour officer started conciliation proceedings .The conciliation proceedings ended into the failure and vide order dated 20.7.2018, the industrial dispute has been referred to the Industrial Tribunal for its adjudication.

4. The Industrial Tribunal at Indore has registered it as Ref. Case No. 15/ID/18 on 8.8.2018 and directed the respondents No. 2 to 19 to submit the statement of claims. On 14.8.2018, a statement of claim along with the documents was filed and notice was issued to the petitioner. On 28.8.2018, Shri Vinay Patwardhan advocate appeared along with Vakalatnama and Interlocutory Application and sought time to file the written statement. On 11.9.2018, the petitioner being Second Party filed an application seeking rejection of the Reference (I.A.No. 2) and the learned Chairman directed the respondents No. 2 to 19 to file the reply. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court on 14.9.2018 challenging Annexure P-4. By order dated 17.9.2018, while issuing notices to the respondents, this Court has stayed the further proceedings of the Tribunal.

5. All the respondents have filed the return refuting the allegations made in the petition.

6. Shri Piyush Mathur, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the State Government has wrongly referred the dispute to the Industrial Court contrary to the provisions of section 2-A and 10 of the ID Act. There is no registered Union in the Establishment of the petitioner, therefore, under section 2-A, the industrial dispute between workmen of industry and industry could not have been referred without being sponsored or espoused by a Trade Union. In absence of registered Trade Union, the dispute ought to have been raised by substantial number of employees, but in the present case, with the support of political parties, only 18 terminated employees have raised the dispute. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance over the jud