ORDER:

The present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed questioning the legality and validity of reference purported under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘ID’ Act) vide Lr.No.D1/1515/2020, dated 19.03.2021 issued by respondent No.2 to respondent No.4.

2. The brief facts of the petition, are :

Petitioner company is registered under the Companies Act and it is engaged in the business of manufacturing Cotton yarn. Unit ‘A’ was established in the year, 1962. Petitioner company engaged permanent workmen, casual workmen and scheme workers. Petitioner unit suffered financial losses and though the management tried to revive the sick unit, however continuously suffered losses. After reopening of the unit in April, 2020 after lockdown due to Covid-19 pandemic situation in the month of March, 2020, the company was unable to operate the unit and as there was no work available to the workmen of the Unit. Finally, petitioner company was forced to issue notice, dated 29.06.2020 declaring lay off w.e.f. 01.07.2020 and copy of said notice was forwarded to the State Government authorities as per provisions of ID Act.

In the unit, there were two trade unions registered under Trade Union Act, 1926 representing all the workmen. Respective unions entered into various settlements under the provisions of I.D. Act from time to time and amicably settled all the disputes either bilaterally or trilaterally i.e. before the Conciliation Officer. When, a dispute was raised by the unions before Labour Department, regarding lay off, management submitted its replies from time to time. However, pending the dispute, unions entered into settlement under Section 18(1) of the ID Act vide settlement, dated 21.08.2020. Management implemented settlements fully and in fact all the workmen who reported for duty after lock down period and those who are on rolls prior to the lockdown during the month of March, 2020 submitted their resignation from service, except four workmen. Accordingly, their accounts have been settled as per terms of the settlements. All the individual workmen, who received benefits also entered individual settlements under Section 18(1) of I.D. Act confirming that there is no dispute of any nature pending between the management and the workmen and all of them received benefits including lay off compensation and left the services of the Unit by 31.08.2020. The facts were brought to the notice of the Labour Department from time to time.

Four workmen, who preferred to continue in the employment were transferred to sister concern of the petitioner company vide letters, dated 01.09.2020, as agreed in the settlements, dated 21.08.2020. However, they have not chosen to report for the duty at the place of transfer. In case of lay-off declared due to shortage of power or due to natural calamity, there is no need for prior permission from the appropriate government as per Section 25-M of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. At the time of declaring lay-off petitioner company informed both the existing trade unions including respondent No.5 about its non-ability to operate the unit due to Covid-19 pandemic situation. The management, pursuant to the lay-off sold out machinery of the unit and the land. Power connection was surrendered to APSEB on 05.12.2020. Factories license was surrendered to DCIF office. Thus, the factory unit has been permanently closed and thereafter no industry exists.

Large number of permanent workmen of the unit availed VRS benefits declared from time to time. Unions and workmen were fully aware of engagement of daily wage casual labour as per day-to-day exigencies of work and, also engagement of scheme workmen. Even casual labour was being paid-on monthly basis as agreed from time to time and no workman or union raised dispute regarding the same. Management, in fact, provided job training under a scheme for some persons every year, who inturn, after completion of such training period