##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHEREJEE

W.P.A 2156 of 2024

M/s. Zydus Healthcare Ltd.

VS.

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

For the Petitioner :: Mr. Asish Kumar Das

Mr. Sunny Nandy

Mr. Md. Baharuzzaman

Ms. Yamini Tiwari

.....Advocates

For the State : Mr. Rajarshi Basu

Mr. K.M. Hossain

…..Advocates

For the Respondents No. 3 : Mr. Balaram Patra

Mr. Suvadip Bhattacharjee

.....Advocates

Heard on

23rd December, 2025

Judgment on : 24th December, 2025

Arindam Mukherjee, J.:

1.

(i) The admitted facts are that there was a dispute regarding the age of

superannuation of a certain class of employees in the employer

organisation including the respondent-employee through a registered

Trade Union while they were absorbed in the service of the petitioner-

company. This issue was considered by the State Government and

referred to the Industrial Disputes Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the

‘Tribunal”) as an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 1947 Act) other Trade

Unions to which the petitioner was a member had also joined such

proceedings for due adjudication.

(ii) The petitioner (employer) raised a dispute as to the maintainability

of the Industrial Dispute which the Tribunal intended to decide at

the threshold while deciding the industrial dispute.

(iii) During the pendency of the said industrial dispute, the service of

the respondent-employee was terminated. Records does not reveal

as to whether the respondent no. 3 (employee)( was dismissed after

a properly initiated and conducted disciplinary proceedings.

(iv) The termination of service of the respondent-employee, therefore,

squarely come under the provisions of Section 33(1) (a) and (b) of

the 1947 Act as the amounts to alter to the prejudice of the

workman concerned in such industrial dispute, his service

conditions.

(v) The employer (petitioner), therefore, could not have given effect to

the dismissal and/or order of termination of service of the

respondent employee without the approval of the Tribunal as

provided under Section 33 (2) (b) of the 1947 Act read with the

provisions of Section 33(1) (a) and (b) with the proviso of the 1947

Act. This also gives the respondent employee a right to apply under

the provisions of Section 33A of the 1947 Act to the Tribunal before

which the dispute was pending.

(vi) Admittedly, going by the number of the application it is clear that

the application under Section 33A of 1947 Act, filed by the

employee was registered prior in time than the application by the

employer under the provisions of Section 33(1) and (2) of the said

Act. The employee’s application is numbered as 02 of 2013. While

that filed by the employer was numbered as 06 of 2013. It is,

however, the case of the employer that its application was sent

from Bombay to the Tribunal before filing of the employees

application but due to reasons beyond the control of the employer,

its application was registered after that of the employee.

(vii) During the pendency of the application under Sections 33A and 33

(2) (b) read with Section 33 (1) and (2) of the 1947 Act the main

industrial dispute got settled between the parties which fact is also

not in dispute. The employer (petitioner) challenged the “No

Dispute Award” order passed in the reference by filing a writ

petition being W.P No. 1541(w) of 2018 which is pending. Prior to

withdrawal of the reference, the petitioner (employer) made an

application for keeping the application of the respondent no. 3

(employee) under Section 33A of the 1947 Act is not maintainable

and should be kept in abeyance. This prayer of the petitioner was

rejected which was challenged before this Court by filing WP No.

195(w) of 2019 which is also pending.

(viii) The withdrawal of the main industrial dispute, however, kept the

applications made under Section 33A by the employee and that

under Sections 33 (1) and (2) (b) of the 1947 Act made by the

pe