1995 (12) TMI 409 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the State should hear Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on a second application after rejection on an earlier occasion.
2. Whether there is an order of reference by the State Government entitling the appellant to have the dispute adjudicated by the tribunal.

Issue 1: State Hearing on Second Application
The appellant, a former workman, sought reinstatement after termination. Despite a rejected application for reference under Section 10 of the Act, subsequent representations were made. The Court clarified that the State Government, under Section 12(5) of the Act, can decide on making a reference based on subjective satisfaction without the need for a hearing or notice to the employer. The Court emphasized that the State's decision on a second application remains an administrative order, not a quasi-judicial one, and reasons are only required when refusing a reference, not when making one.

Issue 2: Existence of Government Reference
The Court noted that while the Minister directed a reference in the second application, the subsequent communication from the Labour Department indicated a decision not to reconsider the earlier rejection, signifying no industrial dispute existed in the Government's opinion. As no reference was actually made to the appropriate tribunal, the Court concluded that relief cannot be granted to the appellant due to the absence of a government reference. The appeal was thus disposed of without costs.