A tribunal located where an employment-related administrative order was issued and the decision taken has territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate a complaint, as the issuance of the order constitutes a material part of the cause of action, even if the employment situs is located elsewhere.

JUDGMENT :-

1) The petition raises an important issue relating to jurisdiction of Industrial Court to entertain a complaint of unfair labour practice when an order of transfer is issued within the territorial jurisdiction of the Industrial Court but is served on the employee posted outside the Industrial Court’s jurisdiction. Thus, the issue that arises for determination is whether issuance of transfer order at Mumbai would confer jurisdiction on Industrial Court at Mumbai for entertaining complaint of unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 when such order seeks to transfer the Respondent from Sriganganagar (Rajasthan) to Shahjahanpur (Uttar Pradesh). By impugned order dated 4 May 2022, the Industrial Court has rejected Petitioner’s objection of jurisdiction, which order is the subject matter of challenge in the present petition.

2) Petitioner is a pharmaceutical company engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceutical and nutraceutical products. It has its corporate office at Nariman Point in Mumbai. By letter of appointment dated 21 August 1990, Respondent was appointed as Medical Representative w.e.f. 21 August 1990. He was posted at Sriganganagar (Rajasthan). He continued to function at Sriganganagar (Rajasthan). By transfer order dated 21 November 2019 issued by the Petitioner from its Corporate Office at Mumbai, Respondent was transferred from Sriganganagar Headquarters to Shahjahanpur (Uttar Pradesh) citing the reason of de-growth of Headquarters at Sriganganagar making it unviable because of which the Management had decided to close the headquarters for business reasons. Respondent filed Complaint (ULP) No.374/2019 under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act) read with Item-4(F) of Schedule-II and Item Nos.3, 5, 9 and 10 of Schedule-IV thereof before the Industrial Court, Mumbai challenging the transfer order dated 21 November 2019. It appears that though application for interim relief was filed by the Respondent in his Complaint, no interim injunction was granted by the Industrial Court. Respondent also did not join duties at the transferred place. By chargesheet dated 5 October 2018, domestic enquiry was initiated against him for remaining unauthorisedly absent. By order dated 24 December 2020, Respondent was dismissed from service. The dismissal order is subject matter of separate Complaint (ULP) No. 40/2021 filed before the First Labour Court, Mumbai under MRTU & PULP Act, which is pending.

3) In Complaint (ULP) No.374/2019 challenging the transfer order, Petitioner filed an application raising objection of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint by Industrial Court, Mumbai constituted under the provisions of the MRTU & PULP Act. Petitioner insisted that the objection of jurisdiction be decided as a preliminary issue. Petitioner also filed an application seeking dismissal of the complaint contending that the same was rendered infructuous on account of Respondent’s dismissal from service. Respondent however insisted that Complaint (ULP) No. 374/2019 be decided on merits as transfer order is the root cause for dismissal. By order dated 4 May 2022, the Industrial Court has rejected Petitioner’s objection of jurisdiction. Order dated 4 May 2022 is subject matter of challenge in the present petition. Instead of challenging the order dated 4 May 2022 immediately, Petitioner filed Written Statement in Complaint (ULP) No.40/2021 raising the issue of jurisdiction and prayed for framing of preliminary issue regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction. In Complaint (ULP) No.40/2021 relating to dismissal, Petitioner filed application for framing of preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction. By order dated 28 July 2023, the Industrial Court rejected Petitioner’s objection for territorial jurisdiction by referring to the impugn