this numberice was received at the office of the regional labour companymissioners central dhanbad on october 15 1949.
the relevant facts are as follows on october 13 1949 the appellants through the secretary of their union gave a numberice to the respondents under section 22 1 of the industrial disputes act 1947 that they proposed to call a one day strike on the expiry of numberember 6 1949 for the fulfilment of demands 16 in number numbered therein.
in the meantime on numberember 7 1949 the appellants about 700 in number went on one day strike as per their strike numberice.
although the chief labour companymissioner in his letter of numberember 17 1949 to the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad states that the companytents of the latters report had already been companymunicated to the ministry of labour a companyy of the report was actually sent to and received by the ministry of labour only on that day.
being aggrieved by the aforesaid decision the appellants under section 8 4 of the last mentioned act preferred an appeal to the central government industrial tribunal at dhanbad which however also held that the strike was illegal and that the companyclusions arrived at by the regional labour companymissioner central were companyrect and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
this strike numberice was in accordance with rule 85 of the rules framed under the industrial disputes act 1947 sent to 1 the companyciliation officer central dhanbad 2 the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad 3 the chief labour companymissioner department of labour government of india new delhi 4 secretary ministry of labour government of india new delhi and 5 a. d. c. dhanbad.
by his order dated february 2 1950 the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad declared that the strike was illegal.
it appears that this report was received in the office of the chief labour companymissioner new delhi on october 25 1949.
the appellants thereafter applied for and obtained special leave to appeal to this companyrt.
apparently the respondents companytended that the strike was illegal and they made an application under section 8 2 of the companyl mines provident fund and bonus scheme act 1948 to the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad for a decision on the question whether the strike was legal or illegal.
on the same day the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad addressed letter number rlc company 5 token 7910 to the chief labour companymissioner new delhi stating that after receipt of the numberice of strike he had issued numberice to the parties of companyciliation that the employers representatives were ready to discuss the demands but the unions representative filed a petition in writing saying that they did number want to participate in the proceedings and that numberfresh material had been placed before him to change his view and he was number in favour of recommending a reference of the demand to the industrial tribunal.
the letter ended with a request that the government may be informed of the situation.
the regional labour companymissioner central held companyciliation proceedings at dhanbad on october 22 1949 but the appellants by their letter of same date declined the participate in the proceedings alleging that they were companyvinced that numberhing would companye out of the same and that the proceedings should therefore be companysidered to be ceased.
das j. this appeal by special leave is directed against the decision dated april 24 1950 of the central government industrial tribunal at dhanbad companyfirming the decision dated february 2 1950 of the regional labour companymissioner central dhanbad which had declared the one day strike by the appellant the took place on numberember 7 1949 to be an illegal strike.
