Industrial Disputes Act | Whether Person Raising Dispute Is A Workman Can Only Be Decided By Labour Court, Not By Govt: Rajasthan HC

Rajasthan High Court granted relief to a government employee who was dismissed from his job without a hearing 15 years ago, by directing the government to refer his industrial dispute to the labour court.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a petition filed against the order of the Government of India (“respondent”) where the respondent had refused to make reference for settlement of the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner.

It was the case of the petitioner that he was engaged as a jalsewak in 2008, however, in 2009, he was dismissed from service without any notice or reasonable opportunity of hearing. Hence, an application was filed by him for raising an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (“the Act”). This application was rejected by the respondent on the ground that the petitioner was employed for only 85 days with the respondent, hence no provisions of the Act were attracted and no dispute existed that could be referred to the Labour Court for adjudication.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the respondent was not competent to adjudicate the matter on its merits, hence, the order passed by them rejecting the application was not sustainable in law.

Agreeing with the argument put forth by the counsel for the petitioner, the Court made a reference to a Supreme Court case of Telco Convoy Drivers Mazdoor Sangh and another vs. State of Bihar and Others in which it was held that while deciding whether to make a reference or not under the Act, the government could only see the existence of an industrial dispute without adjudicating the dispute itself on merits.

In line with the observations made by the Apex Court, the Court opined that under such administrative power, the Court could not have adjudicated whether the petitioner was a workman or not, and further stated that,

“The function of the appropriate Government is an administrative function and not a judicial or quasi-judicial function. It, therefore, cannot delve into the merits of the dispute and take upon itself the determination of the lis. The question whether the person raising the dispute was a workman or not, cannot be decided by the Government, in exercise of its administrative function under Section 10(1) of the Act. This dispute is required to be adjudicated by the competent Labour Court after its reference.”

Accordingly, the order of the government rejecting the application was set aside, remitting the matter to the government for making reference of the dispute.

Title: Mukesh Kumar v Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 210

Click Here To Read/Download Order