1981 INSC 0335
                  Shri Bileshwar Khand Udyog Khedut Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Kodinar

                                                           Vs

                                    Khand Udyog Kamdar Mandal, Kodinar

                                       Civil Appeal No. 129(NL) of 1978

                                           (R.S. Pathak, A.D.Koshal JJ)

                                                      22.07.1981

                                                     JUDGMENT

PATHAK, J. ­

1. This appeal by special leave is directed against an order of the High Court of Gujarat dismissing
in limine the appellant's writ petition challenging an industrial award.

2. The appellant is a cooperative society, whose members include cultivators of agricultural
produce. It operates a sugar factory and its labour force includes seasonal workers. On April 10,
1973, the Khand Udyog Kamdar Mandal served notice under Section 42(2) of the Bombay
Industrial Relations Act, 1946 demanding that 124 seasonal workers should be given permanent
status. Conciliation proceedings were taken and having failed, the dispute was referred to the
Industrial Court, Gujarat. On July 29, 1977 the Industrial Court made an award directing the
appellant to treat the 124 workers as permanent employees, the permanent status being vested in
them with effect from the year 1974-75. The appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court of
Gujarat, and the writ petition was rejected in limine.

3. In this appeal, the main contention is that having regard to the questions which arose in the case
the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition in limine. It is pointed out that in making its
award the Industrial Court adopted the standard that a worker employed for 240 days or more in the
year was entitled to the status of a permanent worker but nowhere did the Industrial Court consider
whether for acquiring that status it was sufficient that the worker was employed for such period in
one year alone, as for example in the present case in 1972-73, or continued to be so employed in
successive years. The Industrial Court specifically referred to the respective periods of employment
in subsequent years, but failed to notice that in each of those years the period fell for short of 240
days.

4. The Industrial Court had also observed in its award that most of the 124 workers had been
employed all the year round in the sugar factory's maintenance department, and said that this had
not been disputed by the appellant. It is pointed out that in its writ petition, a copy of which is
before us, this assumption in the award was specifically challenged and the High Court should have
examined whether the basis for the Industrial Court's finding was warranted.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties on these contentions, and we are of opinion, that
the appellant is right. This was not a case deserving "in limine" dismissal in the High Court. The
High Court should have called upon the respondent to present its case, and then disposed of the
matter on its merits.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the order dated September 26, 1977 is set aside and the case
is remanded to the High Court for disposal on the merits. There is no order as to costs.

</html