Limited implied power to join parties in industrial disputes applies only when presence is necessary for an effective, enforceable award.

Section 18(3)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act implies a limited power in the Industrial Tribunal to summon or add persons not originally party to the reference where their presence is necessary to make the adjudication effective and the award enforceable. That implied power does not authorise the Tribunal to enlarge the scope of the reference or introduce a separate dispute. A party may be joined only if non-joinder would render the proceedings ineffective or the award incapable of implementation. Applying that test, the proposed company was not a necessary party because the controversy would have extended beyond the reference and involved separate questions of liability and true employer status.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Industrial Tribunal has an implied power under section 18(3)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to summon or add persons who are not originally parties to the industrial dispute; (ii) Whether the company sought to be added was a necessary party within the limited scope of that implied power.

Issue (i): Whether the Industrial Tribunal has an implied power under section 18(3)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to summon or add persons who are not originally parties to the industrial dispute.

Analysis: The binding effect of an award under section 18(3)(b) on persons summoned to appear as parties to the dispute indicates that the Tribunal may, by necessary implication, summon additional parties. That implication is reinforced by the limited procedural powers expressly conferred on the Tribunal under section 11(3), which do not in terms include joinder power, and by the structure of section 10, which confines the Tribunal's jurisdiction to the reference and matters incidental to it. The implied power, however, is not a general power to enlarge the reference.

Conclusion: Yes. The Tribunal has an implied power under section 18(3)(b) to summon additional parties, but only within limited bounds.

Issue (ii): Whether the company sought to be added was a necessary party within the limited scope of that implied power.

Analysis: The test is whether non-joinder would make the adjudication ineffective or the award unenforceable. A person can be added only if his presence is necessary to make the reference complete and the award effective. A separate contractual dispute as to ultimate liability for bonus, or a broader controversy as to who is the true employer, would travel beyond the reference and cannot be treated as incidental merely because it may affect inter se rights between the employer and another concern.

Conclusion: No. The company was not a necessary party within section 18(3)(b), and its joinder could not be justified.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because, although the Tribunal had a limited implied power to summon additional parties, that power did not extend to joining the proposed company on the facts of the case.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 18(3)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 implies a limited power in the Tribunal to summon additional parties only when their presence is necessary to make the adjudication effective and enforceable, and not to enlarge the scope of the reference or introduce a separate dispute.

---