Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. These two appeals have been taken up together as they involve common questions of law and fact and the parties are also common.

2. Mr. B. G. Sampat, who has appeared in person in these appeals, was at the relevant point of time an employee of Indian Express Newspaper (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. On 1st August, 1988, while he was posted in Calcutta, he was served with a transfer order by the Bombay office of the Newspaper company transferring him from Calcutta to Bombay with effect from 5th August, 1988. Shri Sampat did not comply with the said order of transfer and made several representations to the Bombay office for reconsideration of the same on grounds of hardship. Such request was, however, turned down and it was made clear to Shri Sampat that he was required to join the Bombay office in terms of the transfer order.

6. The Newspaper company preferred an appeal against the said judgment of the learned Single Judge and a cross-objection was filed therein by Shri Sampat.

7. Both the appeal and the cross-objection were taken up for disposal by the Division Bench on 15th September, 2000. On the question regarding the scope and ambit of Section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, it was observed that the same had been concluded by the Full Bench decision in its judgment which had since been reported in 2000 (1) CHN page 1. The Division Bench then went on to consider the finding of the learned Tribunal regarding the State Government's jurisdiction to make a reference on the dispute raised by Shri Sampat. The Division Bench was of the view that the said question required deeper consideration at the hand of the learned Tribunal and should be decided by the learned Tribunal as a preliminary issue. The Appeal Court directed that in the event such preliminary issue was decided in favour of the workman the learned Tribunal would then consider the matter relating to grant of interim relief in favour of the workman under Section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act afresh in the light of the Full Bench decision in terms of the direction given by the Division Bench in the aforesaid appeal preferred by M/s. Indian Express Newspaper (Bombay) Ltd.

12. The present appeal has been preferred by Indian Express Newspaper (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. against the said decision of the learned Single Judge.

13. Appearing in support of the appeal, Mr. Hirak Mitra, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that the issue for determination in the instant appeal is whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the State of West Bengal is the appropriate Government for making a reference on the dispute raised by Shri Sampat.

14. Mr. Mitra submitted that from the various cases on the point it would be seen that a decision on the aforesaid issue would depend mainly on three tests involving (a) situs of employment; (b) administrative control over the employee and (c) cause of action. Referring to the provisions of Sections 2(a)(i) and (ii) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Mr. Mitra submitted that the said provisions provide sufficient indication that the legislature intended that it is the control over the employee which should be the guiding factor in determining as to which Government would be the appropriate Government to make a reference under Section 10 on a dispute raised by the workmen.

19. In support of his aforesaid submission Mr. Mitra firstly relied on a Full Bench decision of the Patna High Court in the case of Paritosh Kumar Pal v. State of Bihar and Ors., reported in 1984 Lab. IC page 1254, wherein it was observed that territorial jurisdiction in respect of an industrial dispute arising from termination of employment of workman would have to be determined by the situs of employment of the workman concerned. Mr. Mitra pointed out that in the said decision it had been observed that there are three clear-cut principles or tests for determining jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal, namely, (i) where does the order of termination of service operate? (ii) is there some nexus between the industrial dispute arising from termination of the service of the workman and the territory of the State? (iii) that the well-known test on jurisdiction of a Civil Court including the residence of the parties and the subject-matter of the Indian Express Newspaper (Bombay) us. State of W. B. (A. Kabir, JJ) 397 dispute substantially arising therein would be applicable. Mr. Mitra urged that in the instant case, although, Mr. Sampat had been served with the notice of the termination of his service in Calcutta, his situs of employment was Bombay, and, accordingly, in terms of the Full Bench decision in the aforesaid case the industrial dispute should have been raised by Mr. Sampat in Bombay and not in Calcutta.