ORDER

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)

1. The instant petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 29th September, 2021 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court – IX Rouse Avenue District Court, New Delhi (“Labour Court” hereinafter), in LIR No. 2998/2019.

2. The brief facts relevant for the adjudication of the instant petition are as under:

a. The petitioner (“petitioner/petitioner union/petitioner workmen”

hereinafter) is a Union registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 representing majority of the workmen working with the respondent and the respondent (“respondent/respondent management” hereinafter) is M/s Kapsons Worldwide.

b. It is stated by the petitioner that 60 workmen were employed by the respondent to perform the job of tailor from the year 2008 onwards and these workmen were working with the respondent at C-74A, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase - II, New Delhi

110064.

c. Thereafter, the respondent management decided to transfer its workmen from the abovesaid address to M/s Kapson World Wide, D-33, Sector 63, Noida, U.P. (“new address” hereinafter)

vide order dated 20th April, 2019.

d. The petitioner workmen claiming that no establishment of the respondent existed at the new address raised their grievances of being terminated under the garb of transfer and conciliation proceedings commenced between the petitioner and the respondent.

e. Subsequently, vide order dated 1st October, 2019, the Joint Labour Commissioner referred the dispute to the learned Labour Court for adjudication in the case bearing LIR No.

2998/2019, in the following terms:

"Whether the allege termination/denial of duties without giving proper notice to the workmen Sh. Uma Shankar Bhagat (Age - 48) S/o. Dinanath Bhagat & 59 Other workmen (As per enclosed annexure „A') under the garb of order/notice of transfer from C- 47 A, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase -II, Delhi to D - 33, Sector 63, Noida (U.P.) by the Management of M/s Kapsons Worldwide, especially when there exit no factory/establishment/office of this management at the place/address of transfer, is legal and justified and if so, to what relief an individual workman in this dispute are entitled and what directions are necessary in this regard"

f. Against the order of the Joint Labour Commissioner, the respondent filed a writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 904/2022 before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 9th February, 2022 whereby, the Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the presiding officer of the Labour Court to adjudicate the reference by giving ample opportunity to both the sides to present their case.

g. In the abovesaid industrial dispute, the petitioner filed statement of claim on 29th September, 2021, and the respondent orally raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the reference.

h. Thereafter, the learned Labour Court passed an order dated 29th September, 2021 directing the individual workman to approach the Joint Labour Commissioner to make the reference individually as it is not case of collective dispute. The Labour Court further directed the Joint Labour Commissioner to act in terms of the said order.

i. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned order, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking setting aside of the same.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that impugned order is bad in law and is liable to be set aside since the same is contrary to Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(“ID Act/the Act”

hereinafter).

4. It is submitted that the present dispute is very specific as respondent intended to terminate the services of the workmen under the garb of transferring the workmen from C-74A Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase - II to D-33, Sector 63- Noida, U.P., knowingly that respondent does not have any office or establishment at the given address.

5. It is submitted that Section 2(s) of the Act only relates to the individua