AIR 1975 SUPREME COURT 531 ::1975 LAB. I. C. 358 ::1975 4 SCC 838 ::1975 (1) SCJ 75 ::1974 (1) SCR 98

Supreme Court Of India

(From Punj. and Har. (1969) 36 FJR 66)

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. Jaganmohan Reddy, C. A. Vaidialingam , JJ

Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947) , S.10, S.2(k)— Reference - Industrial dispute - Dismissal of employee - Dispute espoused by only 1/12 of the workmen actually in the employment of the Company - Held there being no industrial dispute, the reference was incompetent. Where out of sixty workmen employed in the Company only 18 workmen @page-SC532 sponsored the cause of the dismissed and retrenched workmen and these 18 included thirteen dismissed workers of the Company. Held that the espousing of the cause of the- workmen was only by five workmen who were, at the relevant time actually in the employment of the Company i. e. the proportion was five to sixty. Such an espousal could not be considered to be by an appreciable or substantial body of workmen so as to constitute the dispute an industrial dispute. Hence there being no industrial dispute the reference made by the State Government was incompetent. 1962 (1) LLJ 634, Distinguished.(Para 2 8 11) .....