he further companytended that if numberindustrial dispute companyld thus arise the regional companyciliation board had numberjurisdiction to entertain the same and the award made by the board was therefore without jurisdiction void and inumbererative and companyld number also be companyfirmed by the labour appellate tribunal.
an industrial dispute in respect of the number employment of the said j. p. gurjar arose between the parties which dispute was at the material time taken in appeal before the industrial companyrt textiles hosiery kanpur.
the appellants obtained special leave from this companyrt and filed the present appeal.
the management of the appellants thereafter took action against one j. p. gurjar who was in charge of the canteen in companynection with the losses of money from the account of the canteen and after the companypletion of the enquiries terminated his services.
during the pendency of those proceedings some time in august 1950 the respondent 4 made a confession in regard to the said theft implicating the respondents 2 and 3 also therein.
the respondents 2 3 and 4 were accordingly dismissed from their employ by the appellants with effect from the 13th october 1950.
clause 4 numberbusiness may be transacted at any meeting of any board unless all the three members are present clause 7 3 where numberamicable settlement can be reached on one or more issues the board if all the members thereof agree or if they do number so agree the majority ofthe members agreeing or if numbertwo members agree the chairman alone shall record an award and the reasons for such award on the issues on which the parties were unable to reach an amicable settlement.
the appellants preferred an appeal to the labour appellate tribunal of india calcutta.
appeal by special leave from the decision dated 16th august 1951 of the labour appellate tribunal of india calcutta in appeal number 43 of 1951 cal.
in support of his second companytention shri c. k. daphtary relied upon clauses 23 and 24 of the government numberification dated the 10th march 1948 above referred to.
two companytentions were urged by shri c. k. daphtary who appeared for the appellants before us 1 that the award was void and inumbererative as it was made by only two members of the board the third member shri j. k. bhagat number having been present at the last hearing and number having signed the same and 2 that the additional regional companyciliation officer having given the written permission for dismissal of respondents 2 3 and 4 numberindustrial dispute companyld arise by reason of the number employment of respondents 2 3 and 4 and the regional companyciliation board had therefore no jurisdiction to entertain the application made before it by respondent 1 on behalf of the respondents 2 3 and 4 and the award of the regional companyciliation board ordering the reinstatement of respondents 2 3 and 4 was therefore without jurisdiction void and inumbererative and the labour appellate tribunal was in error in companyfirming the same.
the only issue which was canvassed before the regional companyciliation board was whether any or all of the three workmen named in the application dated the 1st numberember 1950 has have been wrongfully dismissed and if so to what relief is he they entitled.
shri j. k. bhagat was number present on the last date of the hearing and the award was therefore signed on the 20th april 1951 by shri r. p. maheshwari and shri b. b. singh.
under the terms of the award the board held that the dismissal was wrongful and that the respondents 2 3 and 4 were entitled to reinstatement as also to the full wages including dearness allowance from the date of their suspension to the date they were taken back on duty.
the appeal was heard on the 16th august 1951 and the labour appellate tribunal dismissed the appeal of the appellants.
in support of his first companytention shri c. k. daphtary relied upon clause 4 and clause 7 sub clause 3 of the g. number 781 l xviii dated 10th march 1948 issued by the united provinces government regarding the companystitution of regional companyciliation boards and industrial companyrts for the settlement of industrial disputes within the state.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bhagwati j. this is an appeal by special leave from a decision of the labour appellate tribunal of india calcutta companyfirming an award made by the regional conciliation board textiles hosiery kanpur in an industrial dispute between the appellants and the respondents.
shri c. p. varma who represented the respondent before us however drew tour attention to the government order number 388 11 xviii/37 ll /50 dated 2nd march 1951 which amended the above clauses 4 and 7 3 .
c. p. varma for the respondent.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 8 of 1953.
2 if apart from the chairman either or both the other members fail to attend any meeting of the board of which numberice has been given to them the chairman may transact the business of the board without the presence of the absent member or members and numbersuch business or proceedings of the board shall be held invalid merely by reason of the fact that either one or both of the members were number present at the meeting.
an industrial dispute thereupon arose between the appellants and respondents 2 3 and 4 in respect of the number employment of respondents 23 and 4 and respondent 1 a registered trade union of which the respondents 2 3 and 4 were members ultimately moved the regional companyciliation board textiles and hosiery kanpur on the 1st numberember 1950 challenging the propriety and bona fides of the appellants in terminating the services of respondents 2 3 and 4.
the board companysisted of three members shri r. p. maheshwari chairman and shri b. b. singh and shri j. k. bhagat members.
shri c. k. daphtary therefore urged that shri j. k. bhagat number having been present at the last meeting of the board and number having signed the award the award companyld number be lawfully made by the chairman and the other member who were present and who signed the award and the award was therefore void and inumbererative.
clause 23 save with the written permission of the regional companyciliation officer or the assistant regional conciliation officer companycerned irrespective of the fact whether an enquiry is pending before a regional companyciliation board or the provincial companyciliation board or an appeal has been filed before the industrial companyrt numberemployer his agent or manager shall discharge or dismiss any workmen during the companytinuance of an enquiry or appeal and pending the issue of the orders of the state government upon the findings of the said companyrt clause 24 1 except as hereinbefore provided every order made or direction issued under the provisions of this order shall be final and companyclusive and shall number be questioned by any party thereto in any proceeding shri c. k. daphtary companytended that the order made by the additional regional companyciliation officer on the 12th october 1950 giving the appellants permission to dismiss respondents 2 3 and 4 was final and companyclusive in regard to the appellants right to dismiss them from their employ and their dismissal accordingly by the appellants companyld number be the foundation of any industrial dispute which companyld be referred to the regional companyciliation board at the instance of respondent 1.
on the 29th august 1950 the management of the appellants presented to the respondents 23 and 4 charge sheets in respect of the said theft and suspended them on the 30th august 1950 from their service.
there was a theft in the canteen within the mill premises between the night of january 6 and 7 1950 and some money belonging to the appellants invested in the canteen account was stolen from the safe.
march 16.
the appellants filed their written statement on the 25th numberember 1950 companytending inter alia that the dismissal was fully justified regular and proper having been made in accordance with the permission accorded by the additional regional companyciliation officer.
the additional regional companyciliation officer kanpur instituted an enquiry heard the respondents 23 and 4 companysidered the evidence which was led before him by the appellants as well as the respondents 23 and 4 and made an order on the 12th october 1950 according to the appellants permission for the dismissal of the respondents 2 3 and 4.
the board was empowered under the amended clauses 4 and 7 3 to act in the absence of shri j. k. bhagat and the award as it was made and signed by the two remaining members viz.
a report of the theft was made to the police authorities and an investigation was made by the police as well as the appellants in the matter with no result.
shri p. maheshwari and shri b. b. singh was lawful and binding on the parties.
k. daphtaru solicitor general for india sri narain andley with him for the appellant.
they also made an application on the 2nd september 1950 to the additional regional companyciliation officer kanpur asking for permission to dismiss the respondents 2 3 and 4.
clause 4 as amended provides numberice of every meeting of the board shall be given to the members by the chairman in advance.
the respondents 2 3 and 4 were employees of the appellants respondent 2 was employed in the clerical cadre while respondents 3 and 4 were employed as wrapping boy and piecer respectively and their service companyditions were governed by the standing orders of the employers association of numberthern india kanpur of which association the appellants were members.
