Gujarat High Court
Agew Steel Manufacturers Private ... vs Mahagujarat Labour Union on 5 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 815 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 815 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
AGEW STEEL MANUFACTURERS PRIVATE LIMITED
Versus
MAHAGUJARAT LABOUR UNION & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS ROSHNI PATEL AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 05/03/2026
JUDGMENT
1. By way of present petition filed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w the provision of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "I.D. Act") the petitioner has challenged interim order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad below Exh. 7 in Reference (IT) No. 52 of 2022 and prayed inter alia that:-
"8(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari and / or a writ in the nature of certiorari and / or any other appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued
(i) to quash and set aside the impugned order dated Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined 11.11.2022 at Annexure-A passed below Exh.7 in Reference (IT) No. 52 of 2022 by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad;
(ii) to quash and set aside impugned order of making Reference dated 24.04.2022 at Annexure-B made by respondent No.2;
(B) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court Court may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and operation of impugned order dated 11.11.2022 at Annexure-A passed below Exh.7 in Reference (IT) No. 52 of 2022 by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad.
(C) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022 pending before learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad;
(D) Any other and further relief or reliefs to which this Hon'ble Court deemed fit, in the interest of justice; may kindly be granted;"
2. The facts giving rise to present petition are that the petitioner is a small private limited company engaged in the manufacturing of steel doors and their components. Due to global recession, severe competition in the steel fabrication industry and increased cost of production, the petitioner has been suffering heavy financial losses during the last few years and is facing serious liquidity constraints. Despite such financial difficulties, the petitioner has continued its operations and has been paying its workmen wages substantially higher than the minimum wages, i.e., approximately Rs.70/- to Rs.150/- per day above the prescribed minimum wages along with other statutory benefits such as Provident Fund, ESI and regular increase in Variable Dearness Allowance (VDA) every six months as notified by the appropriate Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined Government.
2.1 Earlier also a settlement was arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.1 union in Special Civil Application No.7293 of 1997 and consent terms dated 08.10.1998 were filed before this Court. Even after expiry of the said settlement, the petitioner has granted periodical wage increases to its workmen, including four wage increases between the year 2012 and January 2022. However, ignoring the financial condition of the petitioner, respondent No.1 raised an industrial dispute by submitting a charter of demands before respondent No.2. The said dispute came to be registered in conciliation proceedings as IDC Case No.150 of 2021.
2.2 During the pendency of the conciliation proceedings, a settlement dated 26.11.2021 was voluntarily executed between the petitioner and majority of its employees. Out of 108 employees working in the establishment, 75 employees voluntarily signed the settlement agreeing to revised wages in commensuration with production and their respective categories. The said settlement was also brought to the notice of the Conciliation Officer. However, respondent No.1 union, ignoring the fact that majority of employees had accepted the settlement and were receiving the benefits thereunder, continued to pursue the dispute and the appropriate Government ultimately made a reference dated 24.04.2022 to the Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad, which came to be registered as Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022.
2.3 Before the learned Industrial Tribunal, respondent No.1 filed its statement of claim and the petitioner filed its written statement pointing out, inter alia, that majority of the employees had already accepted the settlement and that the petitioner company, being a loss-making unit with labour cost to sales ratio of about 23.39%, would not be able to sustain any further financial burden. During the pendency of the reference, respondent No.1 filed an application for interim relief seeking wage rise. The petitioner filed a detailed reply opposing the said application and pointed out that employees who had signed the settlement were already receiving wage rise and other benefits and that few employees who had not signed the settlement were neither giving production as agreed nor entitled to additional benefits.
2.4 After hearing both the parties, by the impugned order dated 11.11.2022 passed below Exh.7 in Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022, the learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad, directed the petitioner to pay interim wage rise of Rs.3,000/- per month to each employee.
2.5 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 11.11.2022 as well as the order of reference dated 24.04.2022, the petitioner has preferred the Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined present petition.
3. Heard Mr. Dipak R. Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. U.T. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Ms. Roshni Patel, learned AGP for respondent No.2.
4. Mr. Dipak R. Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Industrial Tribunal is absolutely illegal, unjust and improper. He has submitted that the tribunal has passed the order without appreciating the facts of the case and evidence on record. He has submitted that the tribunal has passed the order against the express provisions of law, evidence on record and principles of natural justice.
4.1 Mr. Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the tribunal has failed to appreciate that it has not jurisdiction to grant interim relief and that too of a final nature has been ordered. He has submitted by way of interim relief, wage rise to the extent of Rs.3,000/- could not have been granted by the tribunal.
4.2 Mr. Dave, learned counsel also submitted that the fact that the employee who did not sign the settlement and who are not giving production are not entitled to any wage rise, is totally and completely ignored by the tribunal. He has submitted that the tribunal has failed to Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined appreciate that due to heavy losses incurred during last few financial years, the petitioner is not in a position to bear any additional burden. He has submitted that the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court with regard to grant of interim relief is completely ignored by the tribunal.
4.3 Over and and above the ground mentioned in the memo of the appeal, Mr. Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner urges before the Court that present petition may be allowed and the impugned order passed by the tribunal may be quashed and set aside.
5. On the hand Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the petition. He has submitted that present petition is not maintainable and required to be dismissed only on the ground that interim order cannot be challenged by filing writ petition. He has submitted that tribunal has not committed any error in passing the impugned award. He has submitted that the demand raised by the union is legal and justified and therefore, the tribunal has rightly passed the order directing to give Rs.3,000/- p.m. as wage rise to the workers.
5.1 Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for respondent has also submitted that the tribunal has recorded that the financial condition of the petitioner is strong and the Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined petitioner is capable to give wage rise to the workers. He has submitted that the petitioner management after year of 1998 has not given any wage rise to the workers and thus the original demand which is pending before the tribunal is required to be adjudicated on merits.
5.2 In view of the above submissions, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, urges before this Court not to entertain the present petition and to dismiss the same.
6. I have considered the material and documents available on record. I have also gone through the record of the petition as well as the impugned order passed by the tribunal.
7. This Court, while issuing notice passed an order dated 19.01.2023. The relevant part of the said order reads as under:-
"2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that challenge is to the interim order passed below Exh-7, wherein wage raised of Rs.3,000/- is ordered. According to the petitioner, there is no substantial evidence to support such a raise and reliance placed upon on the settlement, which is signed by majority of the employees, has given raise, commensurating with the production given by individual. Today, learned Advocate has placed on record Wage Slip, which according to the petitioner is also part of the record before the Labour Court, which goes on to indicate that the raise in the Salary is in accordance with the production given by individual workman and certainly does not give figure of Rs.3,000/- to all the workmen."
8. In the facts of the present case, it is required to be noted herein that the challenge raised by the petitioner is Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined essentially against the interim order dated 11.11.2022 passed below Exh.7 by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022, whereby the Tribunal directed the petitioner to pay interim wage rise of Rs.3,000/- per month to each employee and the main reference is still pending before the Industrial Tribunal.
9. It is well settled that ordinarily this Court would be slow in exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against interlocutory or interim orders passed by the Industrial Tribunal, particularly when the main reference is pending for adjudication. However, the material placed on record indicates that majority of the employees have already entered into a settlement with the petitioner and are receiving wage rise commensurate with their production, and therefore, present respondents-employees are also required to be granted the said benefits.
10. Considering the submissions of both the sides and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the interim order dated 11.11.2022 passed below Exh.7 by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022 deserves to be quashed and set aside.
11. In view of the fact that respondent No.1 Union has agreed to give undertaking with regard to production, Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined they are also required to grant same benefits, which other employees under the settlement with the petitioner are getting. In view thereof while setting aside interim order dated 11.11.2022 passed below Exh.7 by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Reference (IT) No.52 of 2022, it is clarified that the left out employee which are 22 in number are also required to be extended the same benefits which other employees are getting under settlement, however the same is required to be granted upon furnishing undertaking and also upon giving production which the other employees are giving. The said benefits are required to be extended to the employees from the date of interim order passed by this Court i.e. 19.1.2023, however as stated aforesaid employees are required to give same production before the they can claim the same wages.
12. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the Industrial Tribunal Ahmedabad, below Exhibit 7 in Reference (IT) 52 of 2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. As aforesaid, the benefits which were granted to other employees shall be granted to the present respondents-employees as well from 19.1.2023 upon furnishing undertaking and also upon giving production which the other employees are giving.
13. It is clarified that it shall be open for both the sides to raise all the contentions available to them in the eye of Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/815/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/03/2026 undefined law before the learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in the pending Reference. The learned Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad shall consider and decide the said Reference and the contentions raised by the respective parties strictly in accordance with law, after giving full and proper opportunity of hearing to both the sides and after appreciating the material and evidence which may be placed on record. The parties shall cooperate the tribunal in deciding the reference and not seek any unnecessary adjournment before the tribunal. The prayer with regard to challenge the reference order shall be made before the tribunal and same shall be considered by the Tribunal in accordance with law.
14. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
15. Pending civil application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Tue Mar 10 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 11 20:58:19 IST 2026