Interim industrial award within jurisdiction, with operative date fixed by tribunal and writ interference rejected
Industrial disputes legislation was treated as a complete code, so certiorari under Article 226 was not ordinarily available to quash an interim award that remained within jurisdiction. The tribunal's power to grant interim relief pending final determination was upheld, including a direction fixing the operative date of the award. The statutory distinction between an award becoming operative and becoming enforceable meant that a one-week payment direction did not, by itself, offend the scheme of the Act. The reference to the earlier resolution was regarded as background rather than a jurisdictional error, and the employer's writ challenge to the interim award failed.
Issues: Whether the industrial tribunal's interim award was liable to be quashed in certiorari on the ground of excess of jurisdiction or error apparent, including whether the direction as to payment of arrears within a week offended the statutory scheme of enforceability of awards.
Analysis: The appeal turned on the scope of the reference and the tribunal's power to grant interim relief pending final determination of which of the twenty-eight workmen, if any, were ultimately to be retrenched in accordance with industrial law and the report of the chief engineer. The tribunal's reference to the prior resolution was treated as background and not as a misdirection. The statutory scheme also recognised an interim award as an award, and an appeal lay where the dispute involved matters such as wages and retrenchment. On the challenge based on the one-week direction, the statutory distinction between the date an award becomes operative and the date on which it becomes enforceable was material: a tribunal could specify the operative date, while enforceability was deferred by the Act. The industrial disputes legislation was further treated as a self-contained code providing its own remedies, so recourse to Article 226 was not to be used to upset an otherwise lawful industrial adjudication.
Conclusion: The interim award was within jurisdiction and was not vitiated by the one-week direction. The writ of certiorari should not have been granted, and the appeal was allowed.
Final Conclusion: The tribunal's interim award stood restored, and the employer's challenge to it failed in writ jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the industrial disputes legislation provides a complete adjudicatory and appellate mechanism, certiorari will not ordinarily lie to quash an interim award that is within jurisdiction; a tribunal may fix the operative date of its award, while statutory enforceability follows the prescribed period under the Act.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
