Dismissed

National Textile Corporation Ltd. v. John K.O.

Kerala HC22 Feb 2016WA/560/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismissed appeals against an order regarding wage revision and industrial dispute reference. The court held the State Government is the appropriate authority for wage references and clarified that individual salary claims do not constitute industrial disputes under the ID Act.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeals were dismissed. The direction to approach the appropriate government lies.

National Textile Corporation Ltd. Vs John K.O. — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/3RD PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WA. No.560 of 2008 (A) IN WP(C). No.22860/2005

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.22860/2005 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 29-11-2007.

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:

¶8

1. NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LTD., CORE NO.4, TOLSTOY MARG, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶9

2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION LTD., NANCHAPPA MANSION, 29/2, K.H.ROAD, SANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE.

¶10

3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, PARVATHI MILLS, KOLLAM.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN (SR.) SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS 1 TO 7, 4TH RESPONDENT IN W.P(C) AND ADDL. RESPONDENT:

¶13

1. JOHN K.O., S/O.UNNUNNI, AGED 50 YEARS, GENERAL SECRETARY, ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL AND ENGINEERING, WORKERS UNION, PARVATHI MILLS, KOLAM, RESIDENT AT JIJU NIVAS, KANDACHIRA, PERINAD P.O., KOLLAM.

¶14

2. SUNDARA NAIK.P.A., S/O.APPANNA NAIR, THUMPODI HOUSE, CHAMUNDIKUNNU P.O., RAJAPPURAM VIA, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD.

¶15

3. R.PRASANNA KUMAR, CHAKKALAKIZHAKKATHIL, PUTHEN SANGATHOM, KOIVILA P.O., THEVALAKKARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶16

4. V.STEPHEN, DEPPO PURAYIDOM, CANTONMENT RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION, CANTONMENT, KOLLAM.

¶17

5. YOHANNAN.S, S/O.SEBASTIAN MANUEL, ANCY COTTAGE, ARATHY JUNCTION, SURABHI NAGAR, NO.185, AYATHILP.O., KOLLAM-17.

¶18

...2/-

¶19

WA. No.560 of 2008 (A)

¶20

:2:-

¶21

6. V.K.RAVEENDRAN, KALLORVILA KIZHAKKATHIL, MATHILIL P.O., PERINADU, KOLLAM. (DELETED) AS PER ORDER DATED 11.2.2016 IN I.A NO.148/16.

¶22

7. P.P.VISWALAL MOORTHY,

¶23

S/O.P.K.PURUSHAM, POTTETHARA HOUSE, NOW COLONY,

¶24

NARAKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶25

8. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF TEXTILES, NEW DELHI.

¶26

9. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER,

¶27

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶28

R9 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.GIRIJA GOPAL R8 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R1 TO R5 & R7 BY ADV.SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY

¶29

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-02-2016, ALONG WITH WA. NO.570/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

WA. No.560 of 2008 (A)

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:-

¶33

A:- TRUE COPY OF THE MINUITES DATED 17.10.2007 OF THE TEXTILE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE.

¶34

B:- TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 25.1.2008 OF THE TEXTILE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE.

¶35

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:-NIL

¶36

KRJ

¶37

//true copy// P.A to Judge

¶38

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J &

¶39

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J

¶40

W.A Nos.560 & 570 of 2008

¶41

Dated this the 22^nd day of February, 2016

¶42

JUDGMENT

¶43

Shaffique, J

¶44

These appeals have been filed by respondents in W.P(C) No.22860 of 2005 and W.P(C) No.31839 of 2005 by which, the

¶45

learned Single Judge passed a common judgment dated 29.11.2007 and the following directions had been issued.

¶46

“In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:

¶47

(i)The petitioners herein, along with the representative of any recognised Trade Unions in the 3^rd mills, if they are so inclined, shall file a detailed representation before the 4^th respondent producing therewith, a certified copy of this judgment within one month from the date of receipt of the same.

¶48

(ii)The Central Government shall issue notice to the management as well as recognised Trade Unions and the petitioners herein and see that a long term

¶49

WAs.560 & 570/08

¶50

-:2:-

¶51

settlement, as regards the revision of the wages of the workers is arrived at within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶52

(iii)If no such settlement is arrived at, then the Central Government shall, in accordance with law, take appropriate steps for referring an Industrial dispute relating to the revision of wages of the workers in the 3^rd respondent mill, within a period of one month thereafter.

¶53

(iv)Such decision shall be taken in accordance with law. W.P.(C) No.31839/05

¶54

The direction in the above case will be applicable to the present case also.

¶55

Writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.”

¶56

The main contention urged on behalf of the appellants is that

¶57

the appropriate Government under the Industrial Disputes Act is the State Government and, therefore, there was no reason for a direction to the petitioners to approach the Union Government for a reference under the Industrial Disputes Act. That apart, the claim is with reference to fixation of salary by the workers which cannot be an individual dispute in terms of Section 2(k) of the I.D.Act.

¶58

-:3:-

¶59

WAs.560 & 570/08

¶60

As far as W.A No.570 of 2008 is concerned, it is submitted

¶61

by the learned counsel for the appellant that pay revision has already been effected with reference to the third appellant company and the terms of settlement is getting over by September, 2016.

¶62

In regard to W.A No.560 of 2008, it is stated that the third appellant company had been closed down as early as on 26.11.2008 and the matter is pending consideration before the Board for Industrial and Financial Re-construction (BIFR).

¶63

Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, we are of the view that W.A No.570 of 2008 has virtually become infructuous as the pay revision has already been effected by the third appellant company which is applicable till September, 2016. In regard to W.A No.560 of 2008, since the appropriate Government is the State Government and the claim raised is not an individual dispute, only the Trade Union can raise such a dispute. We only clarify that it shall be open for the Trade Union representing the workers to take

¶64

-:4:-

¶65

WAs.560 & 570/08

¶66

appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

¶67

With the above observations, the writ appeals are dismissed.

¶68

Sd/-

¶69

ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE

¶70

Sd/-

¶71

A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE

¶72

krj.22/2/16

National Textile Corporation Ltd. v. John K.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Textile Corporation Ltd. v. John K.O.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajimon Vs Sherly Rajan

V.H.Abdul Salam Vs the Govt. of Kerala

The Deputy Tahsildar (Rr) Vs K.v.Mosses

Jathavedan Namboothiri Vs Rajalakshmi

The Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram Vs Smt.Sobhana Kumari S.

Cochin Port Trust Vs M.K.Kunjappan & Another