Gujarat High Court
Demosha Chemicals Pvt. Ltd vs President/Secretary, Gujarat Mazdoor ... on 6 December, 2023
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1412 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8585 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1412 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1413 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9878 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1414 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8587 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1415 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9875 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1416 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8583 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1417 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9872 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1413 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9878 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1414 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8587 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1415 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9875 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1416 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8583 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1417 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9872 of 2023
==========================================================
DEMOSHA CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.
Versus
PRESIDENT/SECRETARY, GUJARAT MAZDOOR SABHA
Page 1 of 8
Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:42:24 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YOGI K GADHIA(5913) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR AMRISH PATEL for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Date : 06/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
All these Letters Patent Appeals arise from common
judgment and order dated 5.10.2023 of learned single Judge
dismissing the respective petitions. Since the facts are
interactive and issues are identical, all the appeals are treated
for disposal by this common order.
2. As far as the Letters Patent Appeal Nos.1412, 1414 and
1416 of 2023 are concerned, the prayer in the corresponding
petitions filed by the petitioner Companies concerned, was to set
aside the order dated 11.1.2023 of the appropriate government,
whereby the appropriate government referred for adjudication
the Industrial Dispute certain disputes found in common
between the petitioner Companies and the workmen. The said
terms of reference became subject matter of reference
proceedings into Reference (IT) No.1 of 2023 before the
Industrial Tribunal, Surat.
2.1 In the said three cases, the charter of demand inter alia
pertained to the disputes whether the show-cause notices and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
charge-sheets issued to the two workmen named therein were
legal and authorized and whether they were issued with
malafied intention to break the Trade Union activities. It was
also on the term of reference whether the workmen concerned
could be treated as employees of the principal employer or that
of the contractors engaged by the Companies. The fifth term of
reference also was in respect of the age of superannuation of the
workmen.
2.2 The other set of the appeals could include Letters Patent
Appeal Nos.1413, 1415, 1417 of 2023 arising from relatable
respective Special Civil Applications, the prayer was made to set
aside order dated 7.2.2023 passed by the appropriate
government, whereby the demands were referred to to the
Industrial Tribunal, Surat for adjudication. The charter of
demand in these cases pertained to grant of increased salary,
enhancement in the dearness allowance, house rent allowance,
conveyance allowance, other allowances and canteen facilities
including bonus uniform, medical check-up and other facilities.
3. In both the sub groups, the demands were treated common
against the employer Companies which came to be referred to
the Industrial Tribunal.
3.1 The only limb of grievance of the appellants - petitioners -
Companies before the learned single Judge was that since they
were different entities, the charter of demand could not have
been raised in common against them and could not have been
referred to for adjudication by the appropriate government
treating them as commonly applicable to all the companies.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
3.2 The above main contention was canvassed with several
peripheral submissions including that for treating the workmen
as protected workmen, the companies were treated as different,
however for the purpose of referring the charter of demands,
they were treated to be united. Same arguments were advanced
before this court assailing the impugned judgment and order of
learned single Judge whereby petitions came to be dismissed, in
this appeals.
4. On the basis on the record and the material available
including the stand taken in affidavit-in-reply, certain salient
features emerged which persuaded learned single Judge to
decline the relief to the appellants of setting aside the order of
the appropriate government referring the charter of demand in
common for adjudication.
4.1 Learned single Judge considered the following aspects in
this regard, which are to be highlighted,
(i) From the beginning, it was the case of the Conciliation Officer
that all the units of company had common ownership. The
companies were managed and run by one owner.
(ii) Though the companies were established in different years,
they were established by same owners who were the family
members. The creation of the companies were from the surplus
created out of profit earned from one Demosha Chemicals Pvt.
Limited, which was first registered.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
(iii) All the managers and partners of the companies were
members of family of one Gautambhai Shah, Chinubhai S. Shah,
Vijay Monish Shah and such others. The ownership of the
companies were thus held by common persons of one family and
Gautambhai Shah was the Director and Partner of all the three
units. The factory licences were also issued in their names for all
the three units.
(iv) The companies produced various chemical products to be
sell to different industries. The process of these products were
inter linked and there was functional integrity in that regard
also.
(v) The profit derived from different processes was also
commonly treated and only artificial device was created to show
less profit and to take benefits under the taxation and other
laws.
4.2 Section 10(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act was taken into
account. The principle was also observed by learned single
Judge that against the decision of the appropriate government to
refer the dispute for adjudication to the labour court or
Industrial Tribunal, the scope of judicial review would be
limited. Learned single Judge considered that it was not the case
of the petitioners that the appropriate government did not have
the material before it or that is did not apply its mind while
referring the charter of demands to become terms of reference
to be common to the Industrial Tribunal.
5. It could be therefore rightly concluded that prima facie,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
the three different companies which tried to project themselves
as different entities, despite their registrations to be different,
they were sister companies, managed and run by same family
members. Not only that, there was a functional cohesion and
interdependibility amongst all the three companies.
5.1 The disputes which were raised by the workmen could be
considered therefore uniformly applicable and common vis-a-vis
all the three companies which could be tried for their
adjudication together. The operational and factual integrity as
could be prima facie considered, was sufficient and adequate
aspects weighed with learned single Judge to decline the relief.
In the facts of the case, the common reference was justified. This
court is in agreement with the approach adopted and view taken
by learned single Judge.
5.2 What is laid down by the Supreme Court in M/S. National
Iron & Steel Co. Limited Vs. State of West Bengal [AIR
1967 SC 1206] endorses to the view taken by this court. In that
case the reference of disputes between the employer Company
and its allied concerns was made by one order. The court found
the things to be common to employer and since they were
sufficient to show the commonality of interest insofar as the
dispute was concerned, it was held that one order of reference
embracing all concerns was valid. It was further held and
observed that the fact that all employers were not interested in
all relief claimed, was not a matter to weigh against common
reference and that the common reference would not prejudice
anybody.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
5.2.1 In M/S. National Iron & Steel Co. Limited
(supra) it was observed by the Apex Court,
"In order to find out whether there was
sufficient functional integrality between the
employers and whether it would be proper to
have one reference in respect of the four
concerns which are separate entities in the eye
of law, it is necessary to take an overall picture
of their activities and the interest, if any, which
they had in common. In this case, we find that
all the four establishments were engineering
concerns producing iron and steel goods though
of different types." (para 5)
5.2.2 It was observed further stated,
"But the things they had in common are
sufficient to show a community of interest so far
as industrial disputes are concerned. If the
wages, the dearness allowance or benefit of
gratuity or leave rules were altered in one
without affecting the others, the industrial peace
and harmony in the other establishments were
bound to be disturbed.The workmen of all the
four concerns were so closely associated that it
would be asking for trouble if the conditions of
employment in one concern were varied to the
benefit of the workmen of that particular
establishment, leaving the conditions of service
in the other three concerns undisturbed. "
(para 5)
5.3 The above principles of law could be rightly applied to the
facts of the present case.
6. The impugned judgment and order of learned single Judge
could not be said to be booking any error requiring interference
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1412/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023
undefined
in the exercise of Letters Patent jurisdiction.
7. Accordingly, all the Letters Patent Appeals are dismissed
as meritless.
In view of dismissal of the appeals, the Civil Applications
will not survive. Accordingly, they are disposed of.
It is observed upon being submitted at this stage by
learned advocate Mr.Y.K.Gadhia for the appellant that all the
contentions to the Tribunal which could be considerably taken in
law are open and available to both the sides when Tribunal
undertaken the adjudication.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
Manshi
