Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others v. Hotel Workers' Union
Case Details
Acts & Sections
W.P.No.24187 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 23.10.2024Coram:THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULAW.P.No.24187 of 2024 &W.M.P.Nos.26447 and 26448 of 20241. S.Karthikeyan2. M.Kalirajan ...PetitionersVs.The Management of Sundaram Clayton LimitedBelakondapalli, Thalli Road,Hosur, Krishnagiri District ...RespondentPRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari pertaining calling for the records of the Labour Court, Hosur in connection with the common order in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in I.D.No.11 of 2023 and I.D.No.12 of 2023 respectively and quash the same. For Petitioner: Mr. V.Prakash Senior Counsel for Mr.S.GokulFor Respondents: Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s Agam Legal Advocates Page 1 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024 O R D E RThis Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the Presiding Officer dated 23.07.2024 made in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in I.D.Nos.11 and 12 of 2023. The Writ Petitioners are the petitioners and they have filed I.A.No.1 of 2023 before the Labour Court requesting to pass orders on the Interlocutary Application. The Labour Court has chosen to dismiss the petition. Aggrieved over that, the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition.2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the labour court has misguided itself that it did not have power to grant any interim relief. In this regard, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners cited the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1959 SCC Online SC 48 [Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union] and claimed that interim relief can be given if the petitioners choose to remain in the same place and there is prima facie proof to show that the petitioners are deprived of their livelihood and they cannot effectively participate in the case proceedings taken in this regard. 3. Normally, when the Industrial Dispute Petition is filed, such kind of Interlocutory Application seeking interim relief / interim compensation are not filed. Page 2 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024Only during some rare circumstances, these kind of petitions are filed before the Labour court. In the instant case, the petitioners have filed a petition seeking interim compensation and the petitioners have been charged as under:-“(i) 18(m) Lending or borrowing money to or from fellow workmen or indulging in any monetary transaction with fellow workmen or running of chit fund or other schemes for raising loan;(j) 18(p) Engaging in other avocation or undertaking part time or full time employment under any other employer or company in capacity whilst still in the service of the company, except with prior permission of the management;(k) 18(r) Absence from work without permission / absence beyond leave already granted for a period exceeding ten consecutive days;(i) 18(ii) Violation of terms and conditions of appointment order or any rules duly notified andmodified or added from time to time thereto.”4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been dismissed from service on the above said allegations without even initiating any enquiry and hence the petitioners are destablised. The petitioners do not have any income even to conduct the case. So it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that unless the interim compensation is ordered to be paid to the petitioners they may not be in a position to conduct the prodceedings in Page 3 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024an effective manner.5. However, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there cannot be any Writ Petition to be filed challenging Interim order and further there is no perversity in the finding of the Labour Court in denying the backwages. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners attracted the attention of this Court to Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union reported [1959 SCC Online SC 48] in support of his contention, wherein it is held that the interim relief where it is admissible can be granted as a matter of incidental to the main question referred to the Tribunal without being itself referred in express terms. The labour court has referred to the power to grant interim relief depending upon the situation of the each case.7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petition itself is not maintainable because it has been filed to challenge the order passed in the Interlocutory Application. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in D.P.Maheshwari Vs. Delhi Administration and Others reported in [1983] 4 Supreme Court Cases 293. In the said case in Paragraph no.7, it is held that High Court is unjustified in Page 4 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024interfering with the orders and under Article 226 of the Constitution, hence there is no question of challenging the interim order would arise and the said paragraph is reproduced as follows:-“7. We are clearly of the opinion that the High Court was totally unjustified in interfering with the order of the Labour Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. We set aside the Judgments of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, restore the order of the Additional Labour Court and direct the Additional Labour Court to dispose of the reference within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order to that Court. The appellant is entitled to his costs which we stipulate at ruppes five thousand.”8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in exceptional circumstances, the interim relief should be granted, otherwise it may not be possible for the workman to defend his case effectively. In this regard, it is appropriate to extract Paragraph Nos.21 and 22 of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in [1959 SCC Online SC 48] Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union.21. After a dispute is referred to the tribunal under Section 10 of the Act, it is enjoined on it by Section 15 to bold its pro- ceeding Page 5 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024expeditiously and on the conclusion thereof submit its award to the appropriate government. An " award " is defined in Section 2(b) of the Act as meaning " an interim or final determination by an Industrial Tribunal of any industrial dispute or of any question relating thereto." Where an order referring an industrial dispute has been made specifying the points of dispute for adjudication, the tribunal has to confine its adjudication to those points and matters incidental thereto; (Section 10(4)). It is urged on behalf of the appellants that the tribunal in these cases had to confine itself to adjudicating on the points referred and that as the question of interim relief was not referred to it, it could not adjudicate upon that. We are of opinion that there is no force in this argument, in view of the words " incidental thereto " appearing in Section 10(4). There can be no doubt that if, for example, question of reinstatement and/or compensation is referred to a tribunal for adjudication, the question of granting interim relief till the decision of the tribunal with respect to the same matter would be a matter incidental thereto under Section 10(4) and need not be specifically referred in terms to the tribunal. Thus interim relief where it is admissible can be granted as a matter incidental to the main question referred to the tribunal without being itself referred in express terms.22.The next question is as to how the tribunal should proceed in the matter if it decides to grant interim relief. The definition of the word "award" shows that it can be either an interim or final determination either of the whole of the dispute referred to the tribunal Page 6 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024or of any question relating thereto. Thus it is open to the tribunal to give an award about the entire dispute at the end of all proceedings. This will be final determination of the industrial dispute referred to it. It is also open to the tribunal to make an award about some of the matters referred to it whilst some others still remain to be decided. This will be an interim determination of any question relating thereto. In either case it will have to be published as required by Section 17. Such awards are however not in the nature of interim relief for they decide the industrial dispute or some question relating thereto. Interim relief, on the other hand, is granted under the power conferred on the tribunal under Section 10(4) with respect to matters incidental to the points of dispute for adjudication.”9. No doubt, the impugned order is an interim order passed by the labour court. But however, the order is complete in respect of the issue raised before the labour court as to the entitlement of the petitioners to get the interim compensation. In fact, the petitioners have been dismissed from service taking into account of the alleged volatile situation existed in the company and that has resulted in their immediate dismissal. Since the petitioners have been dismissed from service without notice, the petitioners claim that they are entitled to interim compensation without which it would not be possible to effectively defend their case. Page 7 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 202410. So far as the legal assistance is concerned, the petitioners can very well get the assistance of the free legal aid and get an advocate appointed through the same. In respect of the survival aspect, the petitioners could have established with some substance to show that they are not gainfully employed elsewhere and that they had taken efforts and it did not fructify and hence they are starving. It would have been ideal had the petitioners insisted this Court to take up the main matter itself at the earliest and give a disposal. Since the petitioners all along has raised a ground that they have been dismissed illegally without following the principles of natural justice, in the event of getting any orders as to the legality of their termination, the larger purpose would have served by this time depending upon the result of the dispute. The petitioners have not been placed under suspension and hence they cannot expect any subsistence allowance till the completion of the disiciplinary proceedings. If the disciplinary proceedings has been initiated, the petitioners would have got a breathing time to presume the result of the proceedings and make some alternate for their livelihood. The petitioners have been dismissed immediately at the alleged charges that they have been doing real estate business pararallely near the company premises and that they have received money from the co-employees by making them believe that they are having some plots for them, but without accomplishing the same. Now Page 8 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024that the petitioners are out of employment from 25.08.2022. 11. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been denied employment from the year 2019, in such case, the petitioners have got every imperative right to workout for their alternate source for their livelihood by conducting industrial dispute as well, if he is so advised to raise one as such.12. In view of the above stated reasons, I feel it is only appropriate to direct the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hosur to dispose of the main Industrial Dispute itself in a time frame manner. In the result Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hosur, to complete the proceedings in I.D.Nos.11 and 12 of 2023 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 23.10.2024Index: Yes / No; Internet: Yes / NoPage 9 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024Speaking Order / Non Speaking OrderssdTo The Management of Sudaram Clayton LimitedBelakondapalli, Thalli Road,Hosur, Krishnagiri District R.N.MANJULA, J.ssd W.P.No.24187 of 2024 &W.M.P.Nos.26447 and 26448 of 2024Page 10 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 202423.10.2024Page 11 / 11
W.P.No.24187 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 23.10.2024Coram:THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULAW.P.No.24187 of 2024 &W.M.P.Nos.26447 and 26448 of 20241. S.Karthikeyan2. M.Kalirajan ...PetitionersVs.The Management of Sundaram Clayton LimitedBelakondapalli, Thalli Road,Hosur, Krishnagiri District ...RespondentPRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari pertaining calling for the records of the Labour Court, Hosur in connection with the common order in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in I.D.No.11 of 2023 and I.D.No.12 of 2023 respectively and quash the same. For Petitioner: Mr. V.Prakash Senior Counsel for Mr.S.GokulFor Respondents: Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s Agam Legal Advocates Page 1 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024 O R D E RThis Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the Presiding Officer dated 23.07.2024 made in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in I.D.Nos.11 and 12 of 2023. The Writ Petitioners are the petitioners and they have filed I.A.No.1 of 2023 before the Labour Court requesting to pass orders on the Interlocutary Application. The Labour Court has chosen to dismiss the petition. Aggrieved over that, the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition.2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the labour court has misguided itself that it did not have power to grant any interim relief. In this regard, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners cited the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1959 SCC Online SC 48 [Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union] and claimed that interim relief can be given if the petitioners choose to remain in the same place and there is prima facie proof to show that the petitioners are deprived of their livelihood and they cannot effectively participate in the case proceedings taken in this regard. 3. Normally, when the Industrial Dispute Petition is filed, such kind of Interlocutory Application seeking interim relief / interim compensation are not filed. Page 2 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024Only during some rare circumstances, these kind of petitions are filed before the Labour court. In the instant case, the petitioners have filed a petition seeking interim compensation and the petitioners have been charged as under:-“(i) 18(m) Lending or borrowing money to or from fellow workmen or indulging in any monetary transaction with fellow workmen or running of chit fund or other schemes for raising loan;(j) 18(p) Engaging in other avocation or undertaking part time or full time employment under any other employer or company in capacity whilst still in the service of the company, except with prior permission of the management;(k) 18(r) Absence from work without permission / absence beyond leave already granted for a period exceeding ten consecutive days;(i) 18(ii) Violation of terms and conditions of appointment order or any rules duly notified andmodified or added from time to time thereto.”4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been dismissed from service on the above said allegations without even initiating any enquiry and hence the petitioners are destablised. The petitioners do not have any income even to conduct the case. So it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that unless the interim compensation is ordered to be paid to the petitioners they may not be in a position to conduct the prodceedings in Page 3 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024an effective manner.5. However, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there cannot be any Writ Petition to be filed challenging Interim order and further there is no perversity in the finding of the Labour Court in denying the backwages. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners attracted the attention of this Court to Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union reported [1959 SCC Online SC 48] in support of his contention, wherein it is held that the interim relief where it is admissible can be granted as a matter of incidental to the main question referred to the Tribunal without being itself referred in express terms. The labour court has referred to the power to grant interim relief depending upon the situation of the each case.7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petition itself is not maintainable because it has been filed to challenge the order passed in the Interlocutory Application. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in D.P.Maheshwari Vs. Delhi Administration and Others reported in [1983] 4 Supreme Court Cases 293. In the said case in Paragraph no.7, it is held that High Court is unjustified in Page 4 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024interfering with the orders and under Article 226 of the Constitution, hence there is no question of challenging the interim order would arise and the said paragraph is reproduced as follows:-“7. We are clearly of the opinion that the High Court was totally unjustified in interfering with the order of the Labour Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. We set aside the Judgments of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, restore the order of the Additional Labour Court and direct the Additional Labour Court to dispose of the reference within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order to that Court. The appellant is entitled to his costs which we stipulate at ruppes five thousand.”8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in exceptional circumstances, the interim relief should be granted, otherwise it may not be possible for the workman to defend his case effectively. In this regard, it is appropriate to extract Paragraph Nos.21 and 22 of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in [1959 SCC Online SC 48] Management of Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and Others Vs. Hotel Workers' Union.21. After a dispute is referred to the tribunal under Section 10 of the Act, it is enjoined on it by Section 15 to bold its pro- ceeding Page 5 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024expeditiously and on the conclusion thereof submit its award to the appropriate government. An " award " is defined in Section 2(b) of the Act as meaning " an interim or final determination by an Industrial Tribunal of any industrial dispute or of any question relating thereto." Where an order referring an industrial dispute has been made specifying the points of dispute for adjudication, the tribunal has to confine its adjudication to those points and matters incidental thereto; (Section 10(4)). It is urged on behalf of the appellants that the tribunal in these cases had to confine itself to adjudicating on the points referred and that as the question of interim relief was not referred to it, it could not adjudicate upon that. We are of opinion that there is no force in this argument, in view of the words " incidental thereto " appearing in Section 10(4). There can be no doubt that if, for example, question of reinstatement and/or compensation is referred to a tribunal for adjudication, the question of granting interim relief till the decision of the tribunal with respect to the same matter would be a matter incidental thereto under Section 10(4) and need not be specifically referred in terms to the tribunal. Thus interim relief where it is admissible can be granted as a matter incidental to the main question referred to the tribunal without being itself referred in express terms.22.The next question is as to how the tribunal should proceed in the matter if it decides to grant interim relief. The definition of the word "award" shows that it can be either an interim or final determination either of the whole of the dispute referred to the tribunal Page 6 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024or of any question relating thereto. Thus it is open to the tribunal to give an award about the entire dispute at the end of all proceedings. This will be final determination of the industrial dispute referred to it. It is also open to the tribunal to make an award about some of the matters referred to it whilst some others still remain to be decided. This will be an interim determination of any question relating thereto. In either case it will have to be published as required by Section 17. Such awards are however not in the nature of interim relief for they decide the industrial dispute or some question relating thereto. Interim relief, on the other hand, is granted under the power conferred on the tribunal under Section 10(4) with respect to matters incidental to the points of dispute for adjudication.”9. No doubt, the impugned order is an interim order passed by the labour court. But however, the order is complete in respect of the issue raised before the labour court as to the entitlement of the petitioners to get the interim compensation. In fact, the petitioners have been dismissed from service taking into account of the alleged volatile situation existed in the company and that has resulted in their immediate dismissal. Since the petitioners have been dismissed from service without notice, the petitioners claim that they are entitled to interim compensation without which it would not be possible to effectively defend their case. Page 7 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 202410. So far as the legal assistance is concerned, the petitioners can very well get the assistance of the free legal aid and get an advocate appointed through the same. In respect of the survival aspect, the petitioners could have established with some substance to show that they are not gainfully employed elsewhere and that they had taken efforts and it did not fructify and hence they are starving. It would have been ideal had the petitioners insisted this Court to take up the main matter itself at the earliest and give a disposal. Since the petitioners all along has raised a ground that they have been dismissed illegally without following the principles of natural justice, in the event of getting any orders as to the legality of their termination, the larger purpose would have served by this time depending upon the result of the dispute. The petitioners have not been placed under suspension and hence they cannot expect any subsistence allowance till the completion of the disiciplinary proceedings. If the disciplinary proceedings has been initiated, the petitioners would have got a breathing time to presume the result of the proceedings and make some alternate for their livelihood. The petitioners have been dismissed immediately at the alleged charges that they have been doing real estate business pararallely near the company premises and that they have received money from the co-employees by making them believe that they are having some plots for them, but without accomplishing the same. Now Page 8 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024that the petitioners are out of employment from 25.08.2022. 11. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been denied employment from the year 2019, in such case, the petitioners have got every imperative right to workout for their alternate source for their livelihood by conducting industrial dispute as well, if he is so advised to raise one as such.12. In view of the above stated reasons, I feel it is only appropriate to direct the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hosur to dispose of the main Industrial Dispute itself in a time frame manner. In the result Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hosur, to complete the proceedings in I.D.Nos.11 and 12 of 2023 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 23.10.2024Index: Yes / No; Internet: Yes / NoPage 9 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 2024Speaking Order / Non Speaking OrderssdTo The Management of Sudaram Clayton LimitedBelakondapalli, Thalli Road,Hosur, Krishnagiri District R.N.MANJULA, J.ssd W.P.No.24187 of 2024 &W.M.P.Nos.26447 and 26448 of 2024Page 10 / 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24187 of 202423.10.2024Page 11 / 11