ORDER

Regard being had to the similitude of facts and issue involved in both the petitions, they are being disposed off by the common order.

2. The facts of the case are noted from WP No.12286/2024.

3. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 04.03.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed in Case No. 167/7/teen/2021 by Labour Commissioner, M.P. whereby a reference has been made that whether the transfer made by Century Yarn and Century Danim, Village & Post-Satrati, Dist. Khargone of Century Yarn and Century Denum Unit in favour of Manjit Global Pvt. Ltd. and Manjit Cotton Pvt. Ltd. and as a consequence payment of compensation under Section 25-FF of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short I.D. Act) by the concerned unit to the members of respondent No.3/Union is legal and valid ? if not then labours are entitled for which relief ? and in this regard what directions can be issued to the employer ?

4. Counsel for the petitioner argued that he is not aggrieved with the order of reference so far it relates to between the respondent No.2 and respondent No.3, however, making him also part of the reference is not permissible. It is urged that the petitioner had purchased the respondent No.2/Unit on 15.07.2021. The petitioner got its factory license and commenced production on 08.12.2023. The labours of respondent No.3/Union were never employee of the petitioner/industry and, therefore, no liability can be fastened regarding payment of compensation to him. In support of his contention, he produced copy of the registered sale deed dated 15.07.2021 and referred Clause - 7.1.6 of the said deed which reads as under:-

7.1.6. Employees: The Transferor states that salaries and wages of the Employees and Workers have been paid in full till the date of this Agreement. The Transferor undertakes that the Transferor shall make the payment of compensation as contemplated under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and full and final settlement of all legal dues to all the Employees and Workmen. The Transferee shall not be responsible for any liability in respect of Employees and Workmen in any manner whatsoever. The Transferee shall neither be reliable for payment of any statutory dues nor for providing employment to any of the Employees and Workmen. The Transferor shall be responsible for settlement of all the claims of Employees and Workmen of past, present or future, whether individually or collectively, directly or through Unions, including all Pending Litigations Initiated by Unions/Employees and Workmen and payment of compensation as contemplated under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

5. He further argued that the petitioner/industry does not come within the purview of definition of 'Industrial Dispute' being subsequent purchaser of the unit as per the definition under Section 2(k) of I.D. Act which is reproduced as under:-

(k) "industrial dispute" means any dispute or difference between employers, or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, or any person;

6. It is asseverated that the aforesaid reference has been made in pursuant to the order passed by Single Judge dated 13.09.2023 in W.P. No.28206/2021 which was affirmed in the Writ Appeal No. 1768/2023 filed by respondent No.2 decided on 23.06.2023. The respondent No.2 had also filed Review Petition No.207/2024 which was also dismissed by the Division Bench by its order dated 15.03.2024. Against the said order, Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10531-10532/2024 filed by respondent No.2 was dismissed. He was not party to the aforesaid proceedings, therefore, the reference could not have been made treating him to be an employer of the member of the Respondent No.3/Union.

7. The respondent/State has filed reply stating that the petitioner was not made party in the reference order, however, a copy was marked to him