Case: IEL Supervisors'' Association and Ors Vs. Duncan Industries Ltd. and Ors

Kurian Joseph, J.1. The Appellants are before this Court, aggrieved by the judgment dated 24.02.2016 passed by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition No. 12468 of 2002 and other connected matters, by which the High Court remitted the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh adjudication.2. It is the contention of the learned senior Counsel that this is the second time the remittance is made and going by the order dated 14.09.2010 passed by this Court, the High Court could not have made a remand. The relevant portion of the order dated 14.09.2010 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 351-355 of 2006 and other connected matters, is reproduced below:In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the Labour Court has taken two different views in the two references made to it as regards the stout of Supervisors and Deputy Superintendents, we are of the view that the matters need to be remanded back to the High Court to enable both the sides to argue the matter afresh and also the High Court to examine the issues that arise for determination.We, accordingly, allow these appeals, set aside both the impugned orders and remit the matters back to the High Court for a fresh disposal in accordance with law. Keeping in view the importance of the issues that arise for consideration, we would request the Chief Justice of the High Court to direct placing the matters before a Division Bench. Since, the matters have been lingering on for a long time, we give liberty to the parties to approach the Division Bench for an early hearing and disposal. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Needless to say that all contentions available to the parties are left open to be urged before the High Court.3. It may be seen that the order, as above, was passed in view of the conflicting stands taken by two Labour Courts on the issue as to whether the Supervisors/Deputy Superintendents would be workmen or not under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The learned Counsel for the Management submits that in view of the intervening development after the order dated 14.09.2010 passed by this Court, whereby the Management has been taken over by the present Respondent, the matter needs a fresh adjudication. We are afraid, the contention cannot be appreciated.4. The only dispute remaining to be decided is whether the Supervisors/Deputy Superintendents would be workmen or not. There are already two conflicting views of the Labour Courts.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]3. It may be seen that the order, as above, was passed in view of the conflicting stands taken by two Labour Courts on the issue as to whether the Supervisors/Deputy Superintendents would be workmen or not under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947There are already two conflicting views of the Labour Courts.