IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.01.2010 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.5366 of 2009 The Management of ATC Limited 35, Rajaji Nagar Hosur – 635 126. .... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Secretary Department of Labour and Employment Fort St.George Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai – 600 009 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, NO.85, Sankar Nagar Salem – 7. 3. The Secretary Asia Tobacco Company Workers' Union Regn.NO.395/DRP No.35, Rajaji Nagar, Housr – 635 126 .... Respondents Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records from the file of the first respondent herein and to quash its order G.O.(D) NO.554 dated 30.12.2008 and for a direction directing the first respondent to refer all the demands raised by the management for adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal, Madras where already another disputer raised by the workmen has been referred and since they are inter-linked, they need to be adjudicated simultaneously. For Petitioner ::Mr.S.Jayaraman For Respondent ::Mr.A.Arumugam,Spl.G.P. For RR1&2 Mr.Ayyadurai for R.3 O R D E R The petitioner is a Management. Their prayer is to set aside the order of the State Government made in G.O.(D) 554 Labour and Employment Department dated 30.10.2008. By the impugned order, the State Government had declined to refer as many as 15 demands made by the Management for reference. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. It is seen from the records that when the Trade union operating in the petitioner establishment raised certain dispute. A failure report was sent to the State Government. While that dispute is pending, the Management also put certain counter demands including productivity and work norms to be fixed and also in case the workers, who are in direct product and indirect production shows performance, the necessary incentive allowance has to be paid. The State Government on the basis of the failure report and on the basis of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20740 of 2008 dated 25.9.2008 directed the State Government to pass appropriate orders. It is pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the Government issued G.O.(D) 553 Labour and Employment Department dated 30.12.2008 referring two major issues, which were raised by the petitioner Management for adjudication by the Labour Court at Salem. While referring these two issues, the Government declined to refer the other issues for adjudication. Aggrieved by the non-reference, the petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition. 3. Heard the argument of Mr.Jayaraman. This Court finds that the argument advanced on behalf of the Management is unsustainable. Most of the demands put forth by the Management cannot be referred. If the Management feels that by the introduction of the modernisation any existing service conditions are to be altered to the disadvantage, it is well open to them to issue appropriate notice under Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. If the workmen are so aggrieved they can always raise a dispute. Primarily the Industrial Disputes Act is intended to adjudicate the dispute raised by the workmen. There are cases where the Management disputes also can be referred if the reference has to be complete in that sense. But in the present case the State Government had given reasons for declining to refer the dispute on very many counts. According to the counsel for the petitioner, these observations should not weigh with the Court in adjudicating the dispute raised by the Management. It is needless to state that any order passed under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act is only administrative action of the Government and the Courts have time and again held that while making reference or non-reference, the Government cannot go into the merits of the dispute. Therefore, what ever observations made in the impugned Government Order will have no bearing on the disputes, which are referred for adjudication by the Labour Court. 4. Mr.S.Jayaraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Management submitted that since the workers disputes have been raised and referred to adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal, these two issues could not be pending before the Labour Court, Salem and should be transferred and tried along with workers disputes which are pending adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal. This Court is unable to entertain such a request. Section 33B of the Industrial Disputes Act gives ample remedy for the petitioner to avail and therefore this Court is not intending to order any such transfer. It is open to the petitioner Management to file appropriate application before the Government seeking for transfer. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. usk Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar Copy to: 1. The Secretary Department of Labour and Employment Fort St.George Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai – 600 009 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, NO.85, Sankar Nagar Salem – 7. + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.3707 + 1 cc to Mr. S. Jayaraman, Advocate SR No.3361 W.P.No.5366 of 2009 VSN(CO) SR/21.1.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/