The repeal of Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act invalidated the Labour Court's jurisdiction, rendering its judgments null and void.

JUDGMENT

Heard Mr. Somik Deb, learned Sr. Counsel and Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Raju Datta, learned counsel and Ms. S. Chism, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the private-respondents and Mr. P. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

2. This bunch of writ petitions has been taken up and heard together because common questions of law and facts are involved.

3. At the very outset, Mr. Somik Deb, learned Sr. Counsel has raised the question of maintainability of the proceedings initiated by the respondents before the learned Labour Court. Learned Sr. Counsel has submitted that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to proceed under Section 2 -A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act since the said provision had been repealed by the Gazette Notification dated 9th May, 2016 whereby, the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 had been amended and Section 2 -A(2) had been expressly repealed. Due to such repeal of the provision, the findings and awards passed by the Labour Court cannot have any force in the eye of the law.

4. Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the private-respondents has fairly conceded to this submission of the learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

5. On plain reading of the relevant provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, I.D. Act), it comes to fore that before amendment of I.D. Act by the Amendment Act of 24 of 2010, which is called as Industrial Disputes(Amendment) Act, 2010, Section 10 statutorily obligated a workman who approached the appropriate Government for his opinion in case of any dispute between the employer and the workman and if the appropriate Government was of the opinion that any industrial dispute existed or was apprehended, then, it would refer the matter to the Boards, Courts or Tribunals. By the Amendment Act of 24 of 2010 in the I.D. Act giving its effect from 15.09.2010, Sub-section(2) of Section 2 -A empowered a workman to approach the Labour Court or Tribunal by way of making an application directly notwithstanding anything contained in Section 10 for adjudication of the disputes arising out of dismissal, discharge, retrenchment or otherwise after the expiry of 45(forty five) days from the date he makes the application to the Conciliation Officer of the appropriate Government for conciliation of the dispute and the Labour Court or Tribunal has been given powers to adjudicate such dispute. It would be useful to extract Section 2 - A(2) of the I.D. Act, which is as under:

“(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 10, any such workman as is specified in sub-section (1) may, make an application direct to the Labour Court or Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute referred to therein after the expiry of forty-five days from the date he has made the application to the Conciliation Officer of the appropriate Government for conciliation of the dispute, and in receipt of such application the Labour Court or Tribunal shall have powers and jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute, as if it were a dispute referred to it by the appropriate Government in accordance with the provisions of this Act and all the provisions of this Act shall apply in relation to such adjudication as they apply in relation to an industrial dispute referred to it by the appropriate Government.”

However, the legislature in its ow