The Conservator of Forest, Mysore Circle, The Chief Secretary, The Chief Conservator of Forest and The Secretary to Govt. Forest Department vs Thammaiah

H. Billappa, J.—In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have called in question, the order dated 19.10.2011, passed by the Labour Court, Mysore, in Application No. 67/2001, vide Annexure-A. By the impugned order at Annexure-A, the Labour Court, Mysore, has directed the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs. .26,520/- within a period of two months.

Aggrieved by that, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

Briefly stated the facts are:

The respondent claimed that he was appointed in the year 1997-98 as a Forest Watcher to look after the footpath trees on the road side of Hunuganahalli, Mysore District on a monthly wage of Rs. .2,040/-. The respondent was not paid his wages from 1.12.1999 to 31.3.2001. Therefore, the respondent filed an application before the Labour Court claiming arrears of wages. The Labour Court allowed the application and directed the petitioners to pay the respondent a sum of Rs. .26,520/- within a period of two months. Aggrieved by that, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

The learned Government Pleader contended that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. He also submitted that the impugned order is without jurisdiction, for the reason, the Forest Department is not an industry. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court reported in State of Gujarat and Others Vs. Pratamsingh Narsinh Parmar, and also unreported decision of this court in'' W.P. No. 26984/2009 disposed of on 24.11.2009.

The respondent is served and remains unrepresented.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Govt. Pleader.

I find considerable force in the submission of the learned Government Pleader. The respondent claimed that he was appointed as Forest Watcher to look after the footpath trees on the road side of Hunuganahalli, Mysore District on a monthly wage of Rs. .2,040/-. The respondent filed application claiming arrears of wages for the period from 1.2.1999 to 31.3.2001. The petitioners have taken a specific stand that the application is not maintainable and the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter as Forest Department is not an industry. The Labour Court by its order dated 19.10.2011 has directed the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs. .26,520/- within a period of two months. This court, in W.P. No. 26984/2009, following the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in State of Gujarat and Others Vs. Pratamsingh Narsinh Parmar, , has held that the Government Department is not an industry and the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.

In State of Gujarat and Others Vs. Pratamsingh Narsinh Parmar, the Hon''ble Supreme Court has held, if a dispute arises as to whether a particular establishment or part of it is an industry or not, it would be for the person concerned to give positive facts for coming to the conclusion that it constitutes "an industry". Ordinarily, a department of the Government cannot be held to be an industry and it is a part of sovereign function. In the present case, the respondent has not pleaded that the Forest Department is an industry. Ordinarily, the department of the Government cannot be held to be an industry and it is a part of sovereign function. Therefore, the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court reported in State of Gujarat and Others Vs. Pratamsingh Narsinh Parmar, and the unreported decision of this court in W.P. No. 26984/2009 are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, the impugned order is without jurisdiction and it cannot be sustained in law.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order at Annexure-A passed by the Labour Court, Mysore, in Application No. 67/2001 is hereby quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the respondent to pursue the remedy in appropriate forum.