Industrial dispute reference under Section 10 is administrative only; Government cannot decide dismissal merits or enquiry fairness.

While considering a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the appropriate Government acts administratively and may form only a prima facie view on whether an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended. It cannot adjudicate the merits of dismissal, the fairness of a domestic enquiry, the sufficiency of evidence, bias, or proportionality of punishment, as those matters fall within the Tribunal or Labour Court, particularly in light of Section 11A. A refusal to refer on such grounds rests on irrelevant considerations and is amenable to judicial review. The proper course is reconsideration on germane grounds without deciding the dispute itself.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appropriate Government exercises an administrative function, and not a quasi-judicial function, while deciding whether to make a reference of an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (ii) Whether refusal to make a reference on the ground that dismissal or removal followed a domestic enquiry and the charges were proved was based on relevant considerations.

Issue (i): Whether the appropriate Government exercises an administrative function, and not a quasi-judicial function, while deciding whether to make a reference of an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Analysis: The power under Section 10 is confined to a prima facie satisfaction as to the existence or apprehension of an industrial dispute. The Government cannot enter upon adjudication of the merits of the dispute, for that function belongs to the Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court. The decision-making process is administrative in character, although it must rest on relevant grounds and remain open to judicial review if based on considerations that are extraneous or not germane.

Conclusion: The power under Section 10 is administrative, not quasi-judicial, and the Government cannot decide the merits of the dispute at the stage of reference.

Issue (ii): Whether refusal to make a reference on the ground that dismissal or removal followed a domestic enquiry and the charges were proved was based on relevant considerations.

Analysis: A bare reliance on the existence of a domestic enquiry and proof of charges amounts to an impermissible assessment of legality, fairness, evidentiary sufficiency, absence of bias, and adequacy of punishment. Those matters fall within the province of the Tribunal, especially after the enlargement of power under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Refusal on such grounds amounts to adjudication by the Government itself, which is beyond its authority under Section 10.

Conclusion: The refusals to refer were based on irrelevant and extraneous considerations, and a writ of mandamus was warranted directing reconsideration on proper grounds.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded, and the appropriate Governments were directed to reconsider the matters under Section 10 without determining the merits of the dismissals or removals themselves.

Ratio Decidendi: While deciding whether to make a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the appropriate Government may only form a prima facie opinion on the existence or apprehension of an industrial dispute and cannot adjudicate the merits, fairness, or proportionality of the disciplinary action.

---