M/S Bangalore Metro Rail v. Union of India
Case brief
What is this about?
BMRCL Namma Metro appropriate government Central versus State; railway company Section 2(o) Industrial Disputes Act 1947; Indian Railways Act 1890 Section 3(5) incorporation by reference survives repeal; Ram Sarup v Munshi AIR 1963 SC 553; pervasive Central control Metro Railways Acts 1978 and 2002; public utility service Section 2(n)(vi) notification quashed; Karnataka Essential Services Maintenance Act 2013 essential service; Motor Vehicles Act Section 2(28); Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act 1946 Section 14 exemption restrained; protected workmen orders upheld; Central Government Industrial Tribunal reference; Logwell Forge distinguished; CMRL Chennai Metro doubted; LIC v DJ Bahadur relied on.
What did the court decide?
W.P.No.40113/2017 allowed-in-part: BMRCL Employees (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2014 quashed; State Government restrained from granting exemption under Section 14 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 to BMRCL; prayer for prosecution against BMRCL officers rejected. W.P.No.44263/2017 allowed: Notification dated 07.07.2017 (Karnataka Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2013) quashed. W.P.No.197/2020 allowed: Notification dated 18.11.2019 declaring BMRCL a public utility service quashed as without jurisdiction. W.P.Nos.31611/2019, 52329/2019 and 6697/2022 dismissed: the Central Government's reference dated 04.12.2018 and the protected-workmen orders dated 13.09.2019 and 10.02.2022 upheld; CGIT to proceed with the reference. Reliefs not specifically granted in the allowed-in-part petitions rejected. No order as to costs.