Karnataka High Court
Parle Workers Union vs Government Of Karnataka on 14 November, 2013
Bench: Chief Justice, B.V.Nagarathna
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
W.A.No.5798/2013 (L-RES)
BETWEEN:
PARLE WORKERS UNION,
25, 4TH CROSS, BYRAPPA LAYOUT,
NAGASHETTIHALLI,
BANGALORE-560 094,
REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
SRI.KARIBASAPPA. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI: NARAYAN BHAT, ADV. FOR SRI.K.S.SUBRAHMANYA,
ADV.)
AND:
1.GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR,
VIKAS SOUDHA,
VIDHANA VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001,
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2.PARLE PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,
15TH KM STONE,
TUMKUR ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 073,
REP. BY SRI N.SURESH,
FACTORY MANAGER. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, PRL.GA FOR R1)
*****
-: 2 :-
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 39433/13 DATED 6/9/13.
THE JUDGMENT IN THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN RESERVED AND IT BEING LISTED FOR PRONOUNCEMENT TODAY, NAGARATHNA J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
C.A.V. JUDGMENT
1. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 06/09/2013 upholding the objections raised by the Registry with regard to the payment of Court Fee is assailed in this appeal.
2. The writ petition is filed by the Workers' Union, assailing the order dated 03/08/2013, passed by the Government of Karnataka in a proceeding before the Labour Secretary, seeking permission for closure under Section 25(O) (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Act') r/w Rule 77 (C) (1) of the Industrial Disputes Karnataka Rules, 1957 (Annexure "A"). By the said proceeding, permission has been given to M/s.Parle Products Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore - 560 073, to close down their industrial undertaking w.e.f. 09/09/2013, -: 3 :- for a period of one year from the date of issue of the order. Consequently, it has been ordered that every workman employed in the said industrial undertaking would be entitled to receive compensation in accordance with Section 25(O) (8) of the Act. The writ petition has been filed by the workers' union, assailing the said order.
The Registry raised an objection stating that Court Fee had to be paid on behalf of the members of the workers' union. To this objection, counsel for the petitioner had stated that the relief as sought by the union was a common relief due to the impending closure of the industrial establishment and that it was not an individual dispute with different causes of action. Therefore, it was stated that only one set of Court Fee was payable. The Registry posted the writ petition before the learned Single Judge for non- compliance of the office objection regarding payment of deficit Court Fee. Learned Single Judge sustained the objection of the Registry and had granted three weeks time to comply with the office objections. It is against the said order, the writ appeal has been filed. -: 4 :-
3. We note that the writ petition is filed by a trade union of workmen. The workers' union is a single entity or a juristic person. This Court cannot venture to ascertain as to who are or how many persons are represented by the appellant - workers' union. In view of our reasoning in W.A.No.5802/2013, disposed of today, we allow this writ appeal. The impugned order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. The office objection is over-ruled. Only one set of Court Fee is payable by the appellant - workers' union. If the same is paid and all other office objections are complied with, the Registry is directed to accept the same and to post the matter before the Bench having roster, for a decision on merits.
4. The writ appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE *mvs