TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ws that the petitioners were a body which was a result of a Central enactment because of which the petitioners found their identity, any dispute which arose vis-a-vis the parties had to be, therefore, necessarily referred by the appropriate government i.e. the Central Government. This having not been done, the reference was bad and, therefore, the subsequent award also becomes bad in law. The award dated 22.1.2010 passed by the respondent no. 2 is set aside - writ petition allowed . - Writ - C No. - 42221 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 19-4-2019 - Siddhartha Varma, J. For the Petitioner : Divyang Chandra,Mayank Agrawal,Naveen Sinha,P.S.Baghel,Siddharth Khare For the Respondent : C.S.C.,Adarsh Kumar,B.N.Rai,Shiv Kumar Yadav,V.D.Shukla ORDER SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. The respondent no. 3 in the instant writ petition raised an industrial dispute against the petitioners claiming that he was employed as peon by the petitioners on 22.2.1993 and that his services were illegally terminated on 7.10.1998. He raised an industrial dispute wherein he prayed for reinstatement with all back wages ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint in this behalf. 2. Interpretation . (1) In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, (a) associate means an associate member of the Institute; [(aa) Authority means the Appellate Authority constituted under Section 22A;] [(aaa) Board means that Quality Review Board constituted under Section 28A;] (b) chartered accountant means a person who is a member of the Institute. (c) Council means the Council of the Institute; [(ca) firm shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, (9 of 1932), and includes, (i) the limited liability partnership as defined in clause (n) of sub section (1) of section 2 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 (6 of 2009); or (ii) the sole proprietorship, registered with the Institute;] (d) holder of a restricted certificate means a person holding a permanent or temporary r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strial dispute concerning a Dock Labour Board established under Section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 (9 of 1948), or the Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited formed and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or the Employees' State Insurance Corporation established under section 3 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), or the Board of Trustees constituted under section 3A of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 (46 of 1948), or the Central Board of Trustees and the State Boards of Trustees constituted under section 5A and section 5B, respectively, of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), or the Life Insurance Corporation of India established under section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation established under section 3 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961), or the Central Warehousing Corporation establishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1947, or the employer was involved in an activity which was carried on by or under the Authority of the Central Government had to be seen. Learned counsel for the petitioners further relied upon a judgement dated 4.7.2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in W.P. (C) No. 3147 of 2012 (The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and another vs. The Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi and Ors.). It was held that petitioner therein i.e. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was not an industry at all. Still further learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the records revealed that the respondents were not employed by the petitioners but were employed by an employment agency namely Ms. Star Security Agency. Therefore the respondent was not even an employee of the petitioners. In reply learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 Sri Aadarsh Kumar vehemently argued that the Institute of Charted Accountants of India was an employer which was an Industry and also any dispute regarding it had to be referred under Section 4K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as it was essenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce I have found that the reference itself was bad, no finding is required to be given on the issues as to whether the petitioners were an industry and as to whether there was a relationship of an employee and employer existing between the parties. The petitioners were a body which got its existence because of a central enactment being Act No. 38 of 1949. If one goes by Section 2(a)(ii) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, it becomes clear that even an autonomous body which was doing industrial work and was governed by the Central Government then the appropriate Government for making the reference of the dispute was the Central Government. In this regard since the Act No. 38 of 1949 definitely shows that the petitioners were a body which was a result of a Central enactment because of which the petitioners found their identity, any dispute which arose vis-a-vis the parties had to be, therefore, necessarily referred by the appropriate government i.e. the Central Government. This having not been done, I find that the reference was bad and, therefore, the subsequent award also becomes bad in law. Under such circumstances, the award dated 22.1.2010 passed by the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
