The Madras High Court has dismissed an appeal by the Union Government challenging a single judge order quashing a notification of Puducherry Government which declared an award by a tribunal on wage revision of AFT Mill workers in 2001 as "unenforceable" under the relevant section of Industrial Disputes Act (IDA), 1947.
A division bench comprising Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice K Ravichandra Baabu directed the Government of Puducherry to implement the award passed by the Special Industrial Tribunal within a period of two months.
The bench upheld the single judge's September 29, 2010 order which had allowed a petition by the Textile Technical Tradesmen Association seeking to declare Sections 17-A (1), (2) and (3) of the IDA as unconstitutional and a direction to the Centre to publish the award in the Government Gazette.
The Puducherry Government in its August 11, 2001 notification under the IDA section 17-A (1) had indefinitely postponed the implementation of the tribunal award made in a dispute regarding wage revision for employees of the mill.
Citing a 1997 Andhra Pradesh High Court order which held
Section 17-A (1) of IDA unconstitutional, the single judge had declared as illegal the Puducherry Government notification.
Challenging the single judge order, the Union Labour and
Employment Ministry filed the present appeal.
Rejecting the appeal, the Bench said, "The said provision
empowering the Government to declare that the award shall not become enforceable on the expiry of 30 days from the date of its publication under section 17-A(1)(b) was held unconstitutional by the Andhra Pradesh High Court."
IDA being a Parliamentary Legislation, if any of the high
courts declares a provision of such act as unconstitutional, the said decision was applicable throughout the territory of the country or wherever the enactment was held applicable.
"The Union Territory of Puducherry is not justified in issuing a notification on 11.8.2000 by invoking the provision, which is not in existence on the date when the notification was issued," the bench said.
The court noted that if any party was aggrieved about the
award rendered by a competent Special Industrial Tribunal, constituted under the IDA, it can only approach the appellate court to challenge the award and exercise power under Section 17-A(1) which had already been declared unconstitutional.
The said position viz.,declaration of
unconstitutionality
of Section 17-A with sub-sections (1) to (4) of IDA holds good even today as a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reiterated the said position and the judgment had not been reversed or set aside by the Supreme Court.
"Hence the learned single judge was perfectly justified in allowing the writ petition and no ground is made to interfere in the order of the learned single judge," the bench held.
