Bombay High Court
Thomas Dias Of Bombay vs National Textile Corporation ... on 19 August, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004 (3) BomCR 390, 2004 (1) MhLj 526
Author: R Khandeparkar
Bench: R Khandeparkar
JUDGMENT
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.
1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner challenges the Award dated 14-8-1998, passed by the Industrial Court in the Reference (IC) No. 37 of 1987. The Reference has been rejected on two counts; firstly, that in view of the Section 3(5) of the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of the Management) Act, 1983 and taking over of management of the textile undertaking by the custodian in exercise of powers under the Ordinance dated 10-10-1983, all existing agreements stood terminated and therefore based on the earlier contracts the petitioner would not be entitled to claim any benefit, and secondly, that the petitioner has not established that there is any loss caused to the employees consequent to the changes brought about.
3. Upon hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and considering the decision of the Apex Court in N.T.C. (South Maharashtra) Ltd. and Ors. Etc. v. Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh and Ors. Etc., reported in 1993 I CLR 602, wherein it has been clearly held that the provision of the Sections 3(3) and 3(4) do not refer to the contract of employment of the workmen but have in their view contracts other than the contracts of employment of the workmen, and therefore the rejection of the Reference on the basis of the provision in the Section 3(5) of the said Act is clearly improper and cannot be sustained.
4. As regards the point regarding failure on the part of the petitioner to establish the loss caused to the employees on account of the changes brought about, the impugned Award nowhere discloses analysis of the materials on record in its proper perspective and the findings in that regard having been arrived at without considering the materials on record in the manner it was required to be considered, the impugned Award therefore discloses improper exercise of jurisdiction in the matter of rejection of the Reference without analysis of the materials on record and on that count alone it cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside and the matter to be remanded to the Industrial Court to consider the said aspect in detail by analysing the materials on record, after hearing the parties, Needless to say that since the matter is of the year 1987, the Industrial Court shall dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and in any case within three months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court.
5. In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds. The impugned Award is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Industrial Court to decide the same afresh, bearing in mind the observations hereinabove and after hearing the parties within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court. The rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.
