AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Shri N.K. Mody, J.—The prayer in the petition is for quashment of notice Annexure P/10 & 11 and the order Annexure P/12. Vide notice Annexures P/10 & 11 show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has closed the unit illegally and has not paid the amount due to the workers, therefore, the same be paid, while vide Annexure P/12 the appropriate Government has referred the matter to the reference Court for adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a company registered under the provisions of Companies Act. It is submitted that the petitioner has Spec Division and Saw Pipe Division at different units at Pithampur and Anjar in the State of Gujrat. It is submitted that in both the units coating units are available. It is submitted that looking to the need of workers the workers are being transferred from one unit to another. It is submitted that since some of the workers were transferred to one of the division, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has closed the unit. It is submitted that the order Annexure P/12 whereby reference has been made to the reference Court is also not covering the dispute, which has been raised by the petitioner. Learned counsel placed reliance on a decision in the matter of Hindustan Lever Employees'' Union Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, wherein Bombay High Court has held that shifting of manufacture of products from one unit to their other units are the exigencies of trade and the employees cannot oppose it. It was further held that management can organise its work in manner it pleases. Further reliance is placed on a decision in the matter of Moolchand Kharati Ram Hospital K. Union Vs. Labour Commissioner, 2003 SCC (L&S) 1030 wherein Government instead of referring the basic question relating to the real dispute referring consequential question, Hon''ble Apex Court held that in absence of said relevant considerations, High Court was justified in quashing the order of reference. It is submitted that the petition filed by the petitioner be allowed and the notice Annexure P/10 & P/11 and order Annexure P/12 be quashed.
Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that since the matter has been referred by the order Annexure P/12, therefore, the show cause notice Annexure P/10 & P/11 have lost its meaning as the matter has yet to be decided by the competent Court. It is submitted that the dispute raised by the petitioner before this Court can be raised before the reference Court. It is submitted that the petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed.
After heraing the counsel for the parties at length, petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a short direction that the petitioner shall be free to raise all kind of objections which are available to the petitioner in law in support of its case. It is further directed that after giving an opportunity of hearing which includes the opportunity to adduce evidence, Reference Court shall decide all the objections raised in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of.