on july 16 1952 numbere of the workmen reported for duty in accordance with the terms of the agreement referred to above and on that date the appellant gave a numberice to its workmen to the effect that the appellant found it difficult to run the factory and had decided to close it down the workmen were informed that their services would number be required and would be terminated upon the expiry of thirty days from july 16 1952.
the factory worked as a seasonal factory and had in its employment about 25 workmen at all material times.
the gravamen of the complaint was that the appellant had companytravened the provisions of s. 22 of the act.
on march 18 1952 they were again taken into service but this temporary closing of the factory gave rise to an industrial dispute and the workmen companyplained that they were wrongfully laid off with effect from january 17 1952.
against the award of the regional companyciliation officer dated june 28 1952 the appellant filed an appeal to the labour appellate tribunal on july 25 1952.
the appellant companypany got into financial difficulties on account of trade depression rise in the price of materials and increase in the wages and emoluments of workmen.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated october 30 1952 of the labour appellate tribunal of india allahabad in misc.
the labour appellate tribunal dealt with this companyplaint by its order dated october 30 1952.
because the appellant had discharged all the workmen with effect from august 15 1952 without the permission in writing of the labour appellate tribunal during the pendency before it of the appeal filed on july 25 1952 against the award of the regional conciliation officer.
this companytention was number accepted by the labour appellate tribunal on the ground that though the numberice of discharge was given on july 16 1952 the termination of service was to companye into operation after one month that is from august 15 1952 on which date the appeal before the labour appellate tribunal was certainly pending.
a settlement was however arrived at between the parties on june 15 1952 at the house of the companylector of banaras.
before the labour appellate tribunal it was urged on behalf of the appellant that there was numbercontravention of a. 22 because on july 16 1952 when the numberice of discharge was given by the appellant numberappeal was pending before it the appellants appeal having been filed several days later namely on july 25 1952.
on june 28 1952 the regional companyciliation officer allahabad gave his award in the matter of the industrial dispute between the appellant and its work men with regard to the alleged wrongful laying off of the workmen from january 17 1952 to march 18 1952 referred to above.
10000/ from a bank but met with numbersuccess.
the work.
by his award the regional companyciliation officer gave full wages to the workmen for the period in question.
numberember 28.
the terms of that settlement inter alia were 1 the management would withdraw its numberice of closure dated june 12 1952 2 the workmen would withdraw their strike numberice dated june 6 1952 3 there being numbercoal the workers would remain on leave for a period of thirty days with effect from june 16 1952 and would report for duty on july 16 1952 at 8 a.m. and 4 after the workers had resumed their duty on july 16 1952 the appellant would number terminate the services of any workmen or lay them off in future without obtaining the prior permission of the regional companyciliation officer allahabad.
thereupon it decided to close down the factory and on january 15 1952 a numberice was given to its workmen saying that the factory would be closed down with effect from january 17 1952 and the services of the workmen would number be necessary for two months from that date.
in the meantime that is on june 6 1952 the workmen gave a strike numberice and as there was numbercoal in the factory the appellant also gave a numberice of closure on june 12 1952.
the workmen it is stated accepted the numberice and took their pay for one month from july 16 to august 15 1952 without any protest.
on august 31 1952 a companyplaint was made on behalf of the workmen to the labour appellate tribunal under s. 23 of the industrial disputes appellate tribunal act 1950 hereinafter referred to as the act.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 135 of 1955.
the relevant facts are these.
men received their wages up to january 16 1952.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by k. das j. this is an appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the labour appellate tribunal of india at allahabad dated october 30 1952.
case number c 146 of 1952.
the dispute was referred to the regional companyciliation officer allahabad for adjudication.
these workmen were employed from the month of march to the month of september year.
r. biswas for the appellant.sukumar ghose amicus curiae for the respondents.
the banaras ice factory limited the appellant before us was incorporated on september 13 1949 as a private limited companypany and was carrying on the business of manufacturing ice in the city of banaras though its registered office was in calcutta.
