Allowed

Workers of M/s.Ppg Asian v. The Deputy Commissioner of

Madras HC11 Jan 2021WP/20452/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the Deputy Commissioner of Labour to commence conciliation proceedings. The court directed the first respondent to commence conciliation within two weeks to address the industrial dispute regarding disciplinary objections.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus issued directing the first respondent to commence conciliation and take appropriate action within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Workers of M/s.Ppg Asian Vs The Deputy… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 11.01.2021

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶4

W.P.No.20452 of 2020 and

¶5

W.M.P.No.25228 of 2020

¶6

Workers of M/s. PPG Asian Paints Private Limited Through United Labour Federation (Regn No.2657/CNI)

¶7

Rep. by its Secretary, No.149, IV Floor, C.J. Complex, Thambu Chetty Street, Chennai - 600 001.

¶8

... Petitioner vs.

¶9

The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation-1) Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram.

¶10

The Management of PPG Asian Paints Private Limited Formerly known as Asian PPG Industries Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director, Plot No.L10, Phase II, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Mambakkam (Post), Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram - 602 106.

¶11

Mr.V.Mohan Enquiry Officer, C/o. PPG Asian Paints Private Limited, Plot No.L10, Phase II, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Mambakkam (Post), Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram - 602 106. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer:

¶13

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to forthwith commence conciliation proceedings in respect of the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner union on 23.11.2020.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Prakash (Senior Counsel) for Mr.S.R.Bubala Chandran

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.V.Kathirvelu (for R1) Special Government Pleader

¶17

Mr.S.Ravindran (Senior Counsel) for Mr.Basheer Ahmed (for R2)

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The present writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to forthwith commence conciliation proceedings in respect of the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner union on 23.11.2020 and pass further orders.

¶20

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that disciplinary proceedings was initiated against two members, and one was set ex-parte and against the other enquiry is conducted without affording fair opportunity. Hence, objections were made against the enquiry officer. For that purpose, dispute was raised on 23.11.2020 before the first respondent for preparing a panel of enquiry officers and to approach a neutral enquiry officer. Without commencing the conciliation proceedings, the first respondent remained inactive and therefore, the present writ petition.

¶21

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent/management would contend that the first respondent can commence conciliation and it is for the Government to take a decision to refer the dispute raised by the workmen for adjudication. He would rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rahman Industries Private Limited vs. State of U.P., reported in 2016 (1) LLJ 51, wherein paragraph Nos. 3 and 4, reads as follows:-

¶22

"3. The grievance of the Appellant is in a very narrow compass. It is pointed out that there is a peremptory direction by the High Court to refer the dispose by the workmen for adjudication, virtually taking away the discretion on the part of the Government to look into the issue as to whether there is referable dispute at all.

¶23

We find force in the submission made by the learned Counsel. In the scheme of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), it is not as if the Government has to act as a post office by referring each and every petition

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

received by them. The Government is well within its jurisdiction to see whether there exists a dispute worth referring for adjudication. No doubt, the Government is not entitled to enter a finding on the merits of the case and decline reference. The Government has to satisfy itself, after applying its mind to the relevant factors and satisfy itself to the existence of dispute before taking a decision to refer the same for adjudication. Only in case, on judicial scrutiny, the court finds that the refusal of the Government to make a reference of the dispute is unjustified on irrelevant factors, the court may issue a direction to the Government to make a reference."

¶26

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, a direction is issued to the first respondent to commence conciliation and take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Special Government Pleader is directed to communicate this order to the first respondent.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶28

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar dm To The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation-1) Irungattukottai, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram. +1cc to Mr.S.R.Bubala Chandran, Advocate, S.R.No.1693 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.1951

¶29

SSD(CO) CS/10/02/2021

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Workers of M/s.Ppg Asian v. The Deputy Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Workers of M/s.Ppg Asian v. The Deputy Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Santhakumari Vs B.Suresh Kumar

J.Udayakumar Vs Viswanathan

The Management, T.T.172 Vs G.Manoharan, S/O.R.Sendrayan

R.Vasu Vs Harmander Singh IAS

M/s.Shasun Anna Paniyalar Sangam Vs Assistant Commissioner of Labour

N Mohan Vs Dr Sandeep Saxena IAS