1. All these petitions arise out of common order, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgement.
2. The petitioners have filed these petitions with a prayer to quash and set aside the common order of reference dated 04.05.2005 passed by Assistant Labour Commissioner Himmatnagar, whereby the Labour Commissioner has refereed the dispute between the petitioners and respondentsworkmen to the Labour Court.
3. The short facts leading to filing of these petitions are that the respondentsworkmen were working in the petitionerCompany. On 15.12.2004 the petitionerCompany introduced VRS and in response to which the respondentsworkmen had made applications requesting to relieve them under the said scheme. The petitionerCompany duly accepted the said applications of the respondentsworkmen and each of the respondentworkman was paid an amount of Rs.4,50,000/ through cheque and to that effect declarations had also given by the respondentsworkmen.
4. However, after some time the respondentworkmen had raised industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Himmatnagar, (respondent No.2 herein) by stating that the respondentsworkmen were forced to accept the VRS. The respondent No.2. Vide impugned order dated 04.05.05 refereed the said dispute to the Labour Court. Hence, these petitions.
5. Though served none appears for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
6. I have heard learned advocates appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Pujara, learned AGP appearing for the respondent No.1. and perused the material on record. It appears from the record that the petitionerCompany has introduced VRS scheme on 15.12.2004 and in response to that respondentsworkmen were requested the petitionerCompany to relieve them under the said scheme by filing applications. It also appears from the record that under the said scheme of VRS each of the respondentworkman was paid an amount of Rs.4,50,000/ and the respondentsworkmen had also given a declaration endorsing the aforesaid fact. Therefore, this Court is of the view that since the respondentworkman had willingly accept the VRS and they had given declaration to that effect, there is no question of existence of any Industrial dispute between the respondents workman and the petitionercompany.
7. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that respondent No.2 has committed an error in referring the dispute to the Labour Court. Therefore, impugned order dated 04.05.2005, passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Himmatnagar is quashed and set aside. The petitions are allowed. Rule made absolute.
pawan (K.S.JHAVERI,J.)