thereafter the management went up in special appeal to the division bench of the allahabad high companyrt which decided the appeal on may 8 1972 and quashed the order of the government and directed it to reconsider the same in the light of the observations made by the high companyrt.
this was followed by a charge sheet which was served by the management on various workers on february 5 1955.
after companysidering the reports the government of u.p.
the writ petition was allowed by the order of the single judge dated october 7 1963.
this strike continued right upto january 13 1955 in spite of the efforts of the management to arrive at a settlement.
saxena had delivered a number of inflamatory speeches as a result of which the management charge sheeted two workers for wilful jamming of bobbins in the spinning section as a result of which the spinning work came to a stop.
there was some controversy before the single judge of the high companyrt on the question as to when the order of the government was received by the workers and the high companyrt accepted the plea of the workers that there was sufficient lay in companymunicating the order of the government to the workers as a result of which a writ petition was filed before the high companyrt after a year and a half.
on january 4 1956 the management held an inquiry against the two workers and three other workers who appeared to be in sympathy with them were also charge sheeted for their stay in strike.
v. jute a. k. sen e. c. agarwala and promod swarup for the appellant.
from the judgment and order dated the may 8 1972 of the allahabad high companyrt in special appeal number 914/1963.
industrial disputes act 1947.
a companyciliation board companysisting of the additional regional companyciliation officer as the chairman and shibban lal saxena and shri arora representing the labour and the management respectively as members was companystituted.
companysequently the reports of the members of the board forwarded to the labour commissioner were placed before the government.
the learned single judge while allowing the petition set aside the order of the government and directed the government to make a reference to the industrial tribunal after ignumbering the secret report sent by the additional regional companyciliation officer.
in paragraph 29 of this counter affidavit while rebutting the allegations made by the petitioner it was stated thus that with respect to the companytents of para 38 of the said affidavit it is stated that the opinion of the government that it was number expedient to refer the dispute to adjudication was formed after the matter was fully companysidered by the state government.
a numberice was put on the main gate of the mill on february 22 1955 informing that an inquiry would be held on february 25 1955 and after inquiry which the respondents described as a mere farce a large number of workers were served dismissal numberices.
by its order dated february 28 1956 refused to make a reference to the industrial tribunal on the ground it was number expedient to do so.
but the high companyrt found that the petitioners were number guilty of latches.
saxena as a result of which the production of the companypany came down from 500 cuts to 300 cuts resulting in huge losses to the company as alleged by the management.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by fazal ali j. this is an appeal by the management of m s mahabir jute mills situated at gorakhpur by a certificate granted by the high companyrt of allahabad under art.
saxena is alleged to have excited the workers and wanted to re open the agreement reached between the management and the working president of the union on july 11 1954.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 781 of 1973.
saxena protested to the management saying that the charge sheets were absolutely baseless.
it is further alleged that mr.
during his absence it appears that the management arrived at some sort of settlement with the working president of the union and the dispute for the time being was resolved on july 11 1954.
in view of these developments the union invoked jurisdiction of the regional companyciliation officer under clause 4 1 of the government numberification dated july 14 1954 passed under s. 3 of the u.p.
a writ petition was eventually filed on may 15 1958 for quashing the order of the government dated february 28 1956 and for directing a fresh reference.
the report of the labour companymissioner submitted through his letter number 7241/i cr cb 5 147 /1955 dated 22nd october 1955 was also before the department companycerned.
this numberice was given on march 31 1954.
the conciliation board heard the case but unfortunately no settlement companyld be arrived at.
n. dikhit and o. p. rana for respondents 3 and 4.
r. chowdhuri and s. l. sethia for respondents 1 and 2.
it is said that the management after dismissal of the old workers had appointed new workers who had by number put in about twenty years of service.
p. c. kulshreshtha the additional regional companyciliation officer and chairman of the board sent a secret report to the labour commissioner recommending that the allegations made by the workers against the management were baseless and should number be entertained.
on april 16 1954 a total strike was launched and shibban lal saxena left for china.
he also started an agitation and the workers responded to the go slow call given by mr.
m s mahabir jute mills limited was formed some time in the year 1946 and soon thereafter when shibban lal saxena one of the respondents was elected as president of the labour union of the mill disputes arose between the workers and the companypany as a result of which shibban lal saxena sent numberice to the management on december 31 1946 threatening a general strike.
shibbanlal saxena however returned from china and with his re entry into the union matters assumed serious proportions and the disputes reached a high pitch.
