Tata Steel Limited (Hooghly Met Coke Division) Haldia Contractors Mazdoor Sangh and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Tata Steel Limited (Hooghly Met Coke Division) Haldia Contractors Mazdoor Sangh and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent no.2 (Registrar of Trade Unions, West Bengal) to dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 13th July, 2022 within 6 weeks from date (peremptory period), if necessary after a fresh hearing; the decision to be reasoned, taken in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 as directed by the order dated 10th August, 2023, and communicated to the parties immediately after passing but not beyond 10 days from the decision.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Registrar of Trade Unions, West Bengal (respondent no.2) has failed to dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 13th July, 2022 despite the direction in the judgment and order dated 10th August, 2023 passed in WPA 18434 of 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

This court found that pursuant to the order dated 10th August, 2023, respondent no.2 gave a hearing to the parties but the decision was neither taken nor communicated to the petitioners, and the State respondents did not say that any decision had already been taken.

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no.2 is directed, in the presence of all the parties, to dispose of the representation dated 13th July, 2022 made by the petitioners within 6 weeks from date, if necessary by giving a fresh hearing to the parties.

Key takeaways

The 6-week period to take the decision is peremptory in nature, because this is the second round of litigation and there is already an existing order dated 10th August, 2023 directing that a decision be taken.ratio¶9
The decision shall be in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926, as directed by the order dated 10th August, 2023, and shall be a reasoned one.ratio¶9
The decision shall be communicated to the parties immediately after it is passed, and not beyond 10 days from such decision.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA 5616 of 2024, Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction, Appellate Side, High Court at Calcutta, disposed of 14.03.2024 — Arindam Mukherjee, J.) filed by Tata Steel Limited (Hooghly Met Coke Division) Haldia Contractors’ Mazdoor Sangh & Anr. against State of West Bengal & Ors. — Enforcement of earlier judicial direction — By judgment and order dated 10.08.2023 in WPA 18434 of 2023 (previous round between the same parties), the Registrar of Trade Unions, West Bengal (respondent no.2) was directed to decide the petitioners' representation dated 13.07.2022, with opportunity of hearing, in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 — Hearing was held pursuant to that order but the decision was neither taken nor communicated, and the State respondents did not claim any decision had been taken — Court directed disposal of the representation within 6 weeks from date, the period being peremptory as this was the second round of litigation and an existing order of 10.08.2023 already directed a decision — Decision to be reasoned, in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926, and communicated to the parties immediately after passing, not beyond 10 days from the decision — Writ petition disposed of; as no affidavits were called for, allegations in the writ petition deemed not admitted by the respondents.

14.03.2024 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Sl. No.5 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION (PP) APPELLATE SIDE

WPA 5616 of 2024

Tata Steel Limited (Hooghly Met Coke Division) Haldia Contractors’ Mazdoor Sangh & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Mr. Sayak Chakraborti, Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Animesh Bhattacharyya, Mr. Wrickbrata Roy ….for the petitioners. Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Mr. Ritesh Kumar Ganguly ….for the State. Mr. Ranjay De, Mr. Basabjit Banerjee, Mr. A. A. Bose ….for the respondent no.3. By a judgment and order dated 10^th August, 2023 passed in WPA 18434 of 2023, being a previous round of litigation between the same set of parties, the Registrar of Trade Unions, West Bengal who was respondent no.2 in the said writ petition and also the respondent no.2 in this writ petition was directed to take a decision with regard to the representation made by the petitioners on 13^th July, 2022 by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The decision was directed to be taken by the respondent no.2 in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926.

2

It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent no.2 has not disposed of the representation though several months have elapsed from the direction given by the judgment and order dated 10^th August, 2023.

It appears after hearing the parties that pursuant to the said order dated 10^th August, 2023, the respondent no.2 has given a hearing to the parties, but the decision has not been either taken or communicated to the petitioners. The State respondents, however, do not say that any decision has already been taken.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the presence of all the parties, I direct the respondent no.2 to dispose of the representation dated 13^th July, 2022 made by the petitioners within a period of 6 weeks from date, if necessary, by giving a fresh hearing to the parties.

The time period to take a decision in terms of this order is peremptory in nature as it appears to be the second round of litigation and there is already an existing order dated 10^th August, 2023 with the direction to take a decision.

The decision should be in accordance with Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 as directed by the order dated 10^th August, 2023 and should be a reasoned one. The decision shall be communicated to

3

the parties immediately after passing of the same but not beyond 10 days from such decision.

Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition. The same is accordingly disposed of.

Since I have not called for any affidavits, allegations contained in the writ petition, are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, upon compliance of all necessary formalities.

( Arindam Mukherjee, J. )