Industrial dispute reference requires consideration of relevant facts, including contractual liability for bonus before refusing adjudication.

When exercising statutory power to refer an industrial dispute, the Executive must consider all relevant material and avoid misdirecting itself in law. A refusal based on a failure to examine a special contractual arrangement, where labour-related expenditure was borne by the company and the contractor received only a fixed fee, is legally vulnerable. The dispute was not confined to bonus entitlement and quantum, but also included who would be liable to pay the bonus. The refusal to include the company in the reference and to refer liability for adjudication was therefore unsustainable, and the matter had to be reconsidered in light of the relevant facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the State Government's refusal to include the company in the reference and to refer the question of liability to pay bonus for adjudication was lawful.

Analysis: The contract showed that labour-related expenditure, including wages and connected payments, was borne by the company, while the contractor received only a fixed fee. The reference originally made concerned only entitlement to bonus and its quantum, although the real controversy also included who would be liable to pay it. The Government and Labour Commissioner failed to consider the special contractual arrangement and proceeded on the mistaken footing that the dispute was an ordinary contractor-workmen dispute. In exercising statutory power to refer industrial disputes, the Executive must consider relevant matters, avoid irrelevant considerations, and not misdirect itself in law. A refusal founded on failure to consider the material placed before it is amenable to judicial correction.

Conclusion: The refusal was unsustainable and the matter had to be reconsidered by the Government in the light of the relevant facts, including whether the company should be added and whether liability for bonus should be referred.

---