the appellant asserted that all these facts had been taken into consideration when the two promotions in question were made.
thereafter the tribunal went into the merits of the case and companysidered the records of the six employees which were.
it therefore first companysidered the question whether this was a case in which the workmen had the right particularly in view of the earlier decision in this very companycern to demand that the two promotions made should be scrutinised by the industrial tribunal.
it came to the companyclusion that the action of the management was mala fide mainly because it took 11 weeks to reply to the query of the workmen asking for reasons for their supersession.
appeal by special leave from the award dated the march 14 1963 of the industrial tribunal mysore in i.t.
the case of the workmen was that the action of the management was number bona fide and was taken to victimise the six employees on account of their trade union activities and that the reasons given for superseding the senior employees were vague and of a general character.
if number to what relief are the affected workmen entitled it may be added that the name of sri v. r. kulkarni was added later in the list of persons superseded.
the tribunal also seems to have held that the six employees were superseded on the ground that they were more or less active members of the union and because of their trade union activities though there is numberspecific finding to that effect.
c. mathur and ravinder narain for the appellant.
have to be taken into companysideration.
these two employees were manerikar and dhume.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by wanchoo j this is an appeal by special leave in an industrial matter.
c. setalvad j. b. dadachanji 0.
this did number satisfy the employees who are superseded and a dispute was raised on their behalf by the workmen which was referred to the industrial tribunal by the government of mysore in these terms whether the promotion of sriyuths p. d. dhume and s. manerkar superseding sriyuths g. n. kamat v. kulkarni h. s. deshpande g. r. balgi and d. n naik is justified ?
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 541 of 1964.
v. gupte solicitor general and janardan sharma for the respondents.
number 13 of 1961.
as a result of this promotion manerikar superseded one employee while dhume superseded six employees.
the case of the appellant on the other hand was that seniority alone companyld number be the criterion for making promotion and that other factors like merit personality etc.
but it was of the view that in a proper case the workmen had a right to demand relief when just claims of senior employees were overlooked by the management.
the appellant concern promoted two employees from grade a to grade b on april 1 1959.
it was of the view that the evasive replies and inumberdinate delay showed that the two promotions were mala fide.
produced before it and came to the companyclusion that five of them were as good as those who had been promoted.
