Bhim Singh Vs. State of Jandk - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- industrial disputes act, 1947 [c.a. no. 14/1947]. section 18(3)(d); [s.b. sinha & dalveer bhandari, jj] award under binding force held, section makes it evident that all workmen who are employed in the establishment or who subsequently become employed in that establishment would also be bound by an award made by an industrial tribunal. the management as also the workmen were parties to the award. the award in question was passed on a reference made by central government about dispute raised by deposit collectors of scheduled bank who had initiated a scheme commonly known as daily deposit scheme. in the industrial dispute referred to by the central government which has an all india implication, individual workman cannot be made parties to a reference. all of them are not expected to be heard. the unions representing them were impleaded as parties. they were heard. not only the said unions were heard before the high court, they had preferred appeals before supreme court. as the award was made in the presence of the unions, the contention of respondents (workmen) that the award was not binding on them cannot be accepted. the principles of natural justice were also not required to be complied with as the same would have been an empty formality. appellant bank had no other option but to implement the award. if it did not, its action could be held to be penal. writ petition filed by respondent/workmen against order implementing the award could not have been allowed, on the premise that principles of natural justice were required to be complied with before issuing said notice - agarwal, learned counsel has authenticated the letter as well as the teleprinter message, and placed them on record.order1. mr. e.c. agarwala, learned counsel for the state of jammu & kashmir has placed on record a copy of the teleprinter message from the concerned authority dated august 30, 1984 informing him that mr. bhim singh the detenu, whose detention has been challenged in this writ petition under article 32 of the constitution has been released on august 24, 1984. this teleprinter message is followed by a letter confirming the same. mr. e.c. agarwal, learned counsel has authenticated the letter as well as the teleprinter message, and placed them on record.2. mrs. jayamala, learned counsel for the petitioner and a member of the working committee of j. and k. panthars party has filed this writ petition for writ of habeas corpus questioning the validity of the detention of bhim singh, who is a sitting member of the legislative assembly of jammu & kashmir state. when the letter and teleprinter message were shown to mrs. jayamala, she said that mr. bhim singh has not been released because she had contacted all the possible sources enquiring about the release of the petitioner, but he could not be contacted and therefore there is reason to believe that the statement made by mr. agarwal is not correct. we are not persuaded to accept this submission because it is difficult to believe that the state would make through its learned counsel a wholly false statement in respect of a detenu.3. the petitioner is at liberty to take other steps if the petitioner is not released as stated by the learned counsel.4. this petition has become infructuous and stands disposed of accordingly.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Mr. E.C. Agarwala, learned Counsel for the State of Jammu & Kashmir has placed on record a copy of the teleprinter message from the concerned authority dated August 30, 1984 informing him that Mr. Bhim Singh the detenu, whose detention has been challenged in this Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution has been released on August 24, 1984. This teleprinter message is followed by a letter confirming the same. Mr. E.C. Agarwal, learned Counsel has authenticated the letter as well as the teleprinter message, and placed them on record.

2. Mrs. Jayamala, learned Counsel for the petitioner and a member of the working committee of J. and K. Panthars Party has filed this writ petition for writ of Habeas Corpus questioning the validity of the detention of Bhim Singh, who is a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir State. When the letter and teleprinter message were shown to Mrs. Jayamala, she said that Mr. Bhim Singh has not been released because she had contacted all the possible sources enquiring about the release of the petitioner, but he could not be contacted and therefore there is reason to believe that the statement made by Mr. Agarwal is not correct. We are not persuaded to accept this submission because it is difficult to believe that the State would make through its learned Counsel a wholly false statement in respect of a detenu.

3. The petitioner is at liberty to take other steps if the petitioner is not released as stated by the learned Counsel.

4. This petition has become infructuous and stands disposed of accordingly.