TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1950 (5) TMI 19
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some respects are different from those of an ordinary civil Court and it has jurisdiction and powers to give reliefs which a civil Court administering the law of the land (for instance, 'ordering the reinstatement of a workman) does not possess in the discharge of its duties it is essentially working as a judicial body. The fact that its determination has to be followed by an order of the Government which makes the award binding, or that in cases where Government is a party the legislature is permitted to revise the decision, or that the Government is empowered to fix the period. of the operation of the award do not, to my mind, alter the nature and character of the functions of the Tribunal. Having considered all the provisions of the Act it seems to me clear that the Tribunal is discharging functions very near those of a Court, although it is not a Court in the technical sense of the word. The next question is whether under article 136 the Court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for leave to appeal against the decision of such a body. It is not disputed that the Court has power to issue writs of certiorari and prohibition in respect of the work of the Tribunal. The o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....we go by a mere label, the answer must be in the affirmative. But we have to look further and see what are the main functions of the Tribunal and how it proceeds to discharge those functions. This is necessary because I take it to be implied that before an appeal can. lie to this Court from a tribunal it must perform some kind of judicial function and partake to some extent of the character of a Court. Now there can be no doubt that the Industrial Tribunal has, to use a well-known expression, "all the trappings of a Court" and performs functions which cannot but be regarded as judicial. This is evident from the rules by which the proceedings before the Tribunal are regulated. It appears that the proceeding before it commences on an application which in many respects is in the nature of a plaint. It has the same powers as are vested in a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure when trying a suit, in respect of discovery, inspection, granting adjournment, reception of evidence taken on affidavit, enforcing the attendance witnesses, compelling the production of documents, issuing commissions, etc. It is to be deemed to be a civil Court within the meaning of sections 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch an ordinary Court of justice administers. The appellate Court, therefore, can at least see that the rules according to which it has to act and the provisions which are binding upon it are observed, and its powers are notrcised in an arbitrary or capricious manner. The second contention, which is a more serious one, is that the adjudication of the Tribunal has not all the attributes of a judicial decision, because the adjudication cannot bind the parties until it is declared to be binding by the Government under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is said that the adjudication is really in the nature of an advice or report which is not effective until made so by the Government. It appears that a similar objection was raised in Rex v. Electricity Commissioner's, London Electricily' Joint Committee Co. (1920) Ex-Parte ([1924] 1 K.B. 171.) for the purpose of deciding whether a writ of certiorari should be Issued in the circumstances of the case but was dis. posed of in these words :-- "It is necessary, however, to deal with what i think was the main objection of the Attorney-General. In this case he said the Commissioners come to no decision at all. They act merely ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... where the appropriate Government is not a party to the dispute, all that the Government has to do on receiving the award of the Tribunal is to declare it to be binding and to state from what date and for what period it will be binding. Section 15.(2) is mandatory and it provides: "On receipt of such award, the appropriate Government shall by order in writing declare the award to be binding....... " Thus the Government cannot alter, or cancel, or add to the award, but the award must be declared to be binding as it is. In substance, therefore, the adjudication of the Tribunal amounts to a final determination of the dispute which binds the parties as well as the Government. Our attention was however drawn to the proviso to section 15 (2), which runs as follows:-- "Provided that where the appropriate Government is a. party to the dispute and in its opinion it would be inexpedient on public grounds to give effect to the whole or any part of the award, it shall on the first available opportunity lay the award together with the statement of its reasons for not making a declaration as aforesaid before the Legislative Assembly of the Province, or where the appropriate Go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to be urged was that the appellants wanted to adduce evidence but were not allowed to do so. From the decision of the Tribunal however, it appears that the evidence that was shut out related to one isolated point only and the Tribunal might well have been justified in not allowing evidence to be admitted on a point which in its opinion had no direct bearing on the issue before them. After hearing the respondents on this particular point, I am not disposed to hold that the Tribunal has committed such an error as would justify the interference of this Court. The last ground urged is that the award has been signed by only two members of the Tribunal though it originally consisted of three persons and though the entire hearing of the dispute had taken place before all the three persons. This objection does not appear to me to be fatal to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, because under section 8 of the Act it is not obligatory on the Government to appoint a new member to fill a vacancy if one of the members ceases to be available at any time during the proceedings. Under that section, if the Chairman ceases to be available, the Government must appoint his successor, whereas if a member....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Tribunal, it is necessary to examine the provisions of the Constitution dealing with this matter and if possible, to define the limits of the jurisdiction of this Court under article 136. This article is in these terms :-- "(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order m any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India. (2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to any judgment, determination, sentence or order passed or made by any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces." The article occurs in Chapter IV of Part V of the Constitution: "The Union Judiciary." Article deals with the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court. Article 131 confers original jurisdiction on this Court in certain disputes arising between the Government of India and the States etc. Articles and 133 deal with the appellate jurisdiction of the Court in appeals from High Courts within the territory of India in civil matters. By article 134 limited right of appeal in criminal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en qualified by the word "final." It is clear, therefore, that the power to grant special leave under this article against an order of a Court could be exercised with respect to interlocutory orders also. Another new feature introduced in article 136 is the power given to grant special leave against orders, and determinations etc. of any tribunal in the territory of India. This word did not find place in the Judicial Committee Act, where the phrase used was "a Court of justice." It is the introduction of this new expression in article 136 that has led to considerable argument as to its scope. Another expression that did not find place in the Judicial Committee Act but has been introduced in article 136 is the word "determination." A question has been raised as to the meaning to be given to these words in the article. On the one hand, it was contended that the words "determination" and "tribunal" were introduced in the article in order to bring within the scope of the applellate jurisdiction of this Court all orders of tribunals of different varieties and descriptions. On the other hand, it was said that the words "determination....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by a Court ,' in other words, it was said that unless there was a judicial determination of a controversy between two parties, the order would not be appealable. That in the case of an Industrial Tribunal what gives binding force to the award is the declaration of the government, that the spark of life to it is given by that declaration and without that, the award of the Tribunal is lifeless and has no enforceability and hence cannot be held to be of an appealable nature. It was further said that in cases between the Government and its employees, by the procedure prescribed in the Act the award could also be rejected, and that being so, by its own determination a tribunal could not impose a liability or affect rights. Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, appearing for the bank, on the other hand argued that whenever a tribunal, whether exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions, determined a matter in a judicial manner, then such a determination is within article 136. It was said that an Industrial Tribunal has no administrative or executive functions, that its duty is to adjudicate on an industrial dispute, i.e., to act as a Judge, on certain kinds of disputes between employers and employ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce and lead to grave miscarriage of justice. The exercise of these, powers could only have been contemplated in cases which affect the rights of people living within the territory of India in respect of their person, property or status. The question, therefore, for consideration is whether the jurisdiction conferred by use of unambiguous phraseology and by words which have a plain grammatical meaning and are of the widest amplitudeshould be limited and restricted on considerations suggested by Mr. Alladi. The construction suggested by the learned counsel, if accepted, would in the first instance make the use of certain words in the article unnecessary and redundant and would run counter to the spirit of the Constitution. It must be presumed that the draftsmen of the Constitution knew well the fact that there were a number of tribunals constituted in this country previous to the coming into force of the Constitution which were performing certain administrative, quasi judicial or domestic functions, that some of them had even the trappings of a Court but in spite of those trappings could not be given that description. It must also be presumed that the Constitution-makers were aware o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t which, nevertheless, are not Courts in the strict sense of exercising judicial power. It seems to me that such tribunals though they are not full-fledged Courts, yet exercise quasi-judicial functions and are within the ambit of the word "tribunal" in article 136 of the Constitution. It was pointed out in the above case that a tribunal is not necessarily a Court in this strict sense because it gives a final decision, nor because it hears witnesses oath nor because two or more contending parties appear before it between whom it has to decide, nor because it gives decisions which affect the rights of subjects nor because there is an appeal to a Court, nor because it is a body to which a matter is referred by another body. The intention of the Constitution by use of the word "tribunal" in the article seems to have been to include within the scope of article 136 tribunals adorned with similar trappings as Court but strictly not coming within that definition. Various definitions of the phrase "judicial power" have been given from time to time. The best definition of it on high authority is the one given by Griffith C.J. in Huddart, Parker & Co. v. Moorehea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rious countries today. Porter on Administrative Law, 1929 Edn., page 194, was also relied upon. There can be no doubt that varieties of administrative tribunals and domestic tribunals are known to exist in this country as well as in other countries of the world but the real question to decide in each case is as to the extent of judicial power of the State exercised by them. Tribunals which do not derive authority from the sovereign power cannot fall within the ambit of article 136. The condition precedent for bringing a tribunal within the ambit of article 136 is that it should be constituted by the State. Again a tribunal would be outside the ambit of article 136 if it is not invested with any part of the judicial functions of the State but discharges purely administrative or executive duties. Tribunals, however, which are found invested with certain functions of a Court of justice and have some of its trappings also would fall within the ambit of article 136 and would be subject to the appellate control of this Court whenever it is found necessary to exercise that control in the interests of justice. It is now convenient to consider whether a tribunal constituted under the Indus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is given to make rules for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of the Act. Such rules can provide in respect of matters which concern the powers and procedure of tribunals including rules as to the summoning of witnesses, the production of documents relevant to the subject matter and as to appearance of legal practitioners in proceedings under this Act. Rule 3 of these rules provides that any application for the reference of an industrial dispute to a tribunal shall be made in form (A) and shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth, inter alia, the names of the parties to the dispute and the specific matters of dispute. It is in a sense in the nature of a plaint in a suit. In rule 13 power is given to administer oaths. Rule 14 provides as follows :- "A tribunal may accept, admit or call for evidence at any stage of the proceedings before it and in such manner as it may think fit." Rule 17 provides that at its first sitting the tribunal is. to call upon the parties to state their case. In rule 19 provision has been made for proceedings ex-parte. Rule 21 provides that in addition to the powers conferred by subsection (3) of section 11 of the Act, a tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nishable. The powers exercisable by a tribunal of this nature were considered in a judgment' of the Federal Court of India in Western India Automobile Association v. Industrial Tribunal, Bombay (x), and it was observed that such a tribunal can do what no Court can, namely, add to or alter the terms or conditions of the contract of service. The tribunal having been entrusted with the duty of adjudicating a dispute of a peculiar character, it is for this reason that it is armed with extraordinary powers. These powers, however, are derived from the statute. These are the rules of the game and it has to decide according to these rules. The powers conferred have the sanction of law behind it and are not exercisable by reason of any discretion vested in the members of the tribunal. The adjudication of the dispute has to be in accordance with evidence legally adduced and the parties have a right to be heard and being represented by a legal practitioner. Right to examine and cross-examine witnesses has been given to the parties and finally they can address the tribunal when evidence is closed. The whole procedure adopted by the Act and the rules is modelled on the Code of Civil Procedure. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lows :--- "(1) Where an industrial dispute has been referred to a Tribunal for adjudication, it shall hold its proceedings expeditiously and shall, as soon as practicable on the conclusion thereof, submit its award to the appropriate Government. (2) On receipt of such award, the appropriate Government shall by order in writing declare the award to be binding. Provided that where the appropriate Government is a party to the dispute and in its opinion it would be inexpedient on public grounds to give effect to the whole or any part of the award, it shall on the first available opportunity lay the award together with the statement of its reasons for not making a declaration as aforesaid before the Legislative Assembly of the province, or where the appropriate Government, is the Central Government, before the Central Legislature, an d shall, as soon as may be, cause to be moved therein a resolution for the consideration of the award; and the Legislative Assembly or as the case may be, the Central Legislature, may by its resolution confirm, modify or reject the award. (3) On the passing of a resolution under the proviso to sub-section (2), unless the award is rejected thereby, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t with or without modifications. The Houses of Parliament may put anything into the order they please, whether consistent with the Act of 1919, or not. Until they have approved, nothing is decided, and in truth the whole procedure, draft scheme, inquiry, order, confirmation, approval, is only part of a process by which Parliament is expressing its will, and at no stage is subject to, any control by the Courts.. It is unnecessary to emphasize the constitutional importance of this contention. Given its full effect, it means that the checks and safeguards which have been imposed by Act of Parliament, including the freedom from compulsory taking, can be removed, and new and onerous and inconsistent obligations imposed without an Act of Parliament, and by simple resolution of both Houses of Parliament. I do not find it necessary to determine whether, on the proper construction of the statute, resolutions of the two Houses of Parliament could have the effect claimed. In the provision that the final decision of the Commissioners is not to be operative until it has been approved by the two Houses of Parliament I find nothing inconsistent with the view that they act judicially and within th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with or without conditions or modifications. In sub-section (5) it was stated that the order of the Minister when made shall have effect as if enacted in this Act. It was held be the Court of Appeal that as the order made by the Minister was made without the statutory conditions having been complied with it was ultra vires and therefore a writ of certiorari should issue for the purpose of quashing it. Reliance was placed by Scrutton L.J. on Rex v. Electricity Commissioners ([1931] A.C. 494). The same.view was expressed in Minister of Health v. The King ([1924] 1 K.B. 171.). It was observed that judicial review by prohibition or a writ of certiorari was permissible if the Minister of Health in confirming the order exceeded his statutory powers. It is clear therefore that simply because an order has to be confirmed by a Minister or by the Government it in any way affects the power of judicial review. Reference may also be made to the observations in Smith v. The Queen (3 A.C. 245.). At page 623 it was observed that it is a common principle in every case which has in itself the character of a judicial proceeding that the party against whom a judgment is to operate shall have an opport....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ake their action a judicial action in the sense that it can be tested and altered by appeal. It is no more judicial than was the action of the commissioners and the governor. The Court is to be guided by equity and good conscience and the best evidence. So were the commissioners. So every public officer ought to be. But they are expressly exonerated from all rules of law and equity, and all legal forms. How then can the propriety of their decision be tested on appeal ? What are the canons by 'which this Board is to be guided in advising Her Majesty whether the Supreme Court is right or wrong ? It seems almost impossible that decisions can be varied except by reference to some rule, whereas the Court making them is free from rules. If appeals were allowed, the certain result would be to establish some system of rules, and that is the very thing from which the Tasmanian Legislature has desired to leave the Supreme Court free and unfettered in each case. If it were clear that appeals ought to be allowed such difficulties would doubtless be met somehow. But there are strong arguments to show that the matter is not of an appreciable nature." One would have expected that after this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....als is corrected as soon as possible and with expedition. It may be mentioned that it is no novel practice for a court empowered to grant special leave to exercise its powers even though there may be intermediate rights of appeal or other remedies available, if it is considered essential to do so in extraordinary situations. Vide Bentwick's Privy Council Practice, 3rd Edn., page 125. Therein it is stated as follows :-- "In several cases from Jamaica, the Privy Council granted leave to appeal to the Queen in Council directly from the Supreme Court, without an intermediate appeal (which would have been attended with much expense and delay) to the Court of Error in the island, there being in each of those cases manifestly some point of law raised which deserved discussion." The cases were In Re Barnett(4 Moo. 453.), Harrison v. Scott (5 Moo. 357), and Attorney-General of Jamacia v. Manderson (6 Moo. 239.). The phraseology employed in article 136 itself justifies this course. The article empowers this Court to grant special leave against sentences or orders made by any court. In all other articles of the Constitution right of appeal is conferred against final decisions of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Constitution, and can only be vested in the courts mentioned in that section. Mr. Alladi placed reliance on a passage at page 467 in the judgment of Isaacs and Rich JJ., which reads as follows :-- "The arbitral part of the Act, therefore, is quite within the power of pl. xxxv, and is not intended by the Act to be exercised by an ordinary Court of Justice, which, it is suggested, Parliament by some strange perversity proceeded to destroy at birth. It is true that enforcement provisions are found....... But all this was in imitation of the State Acts of Arbitration, and not in reliance on the Judicature Chapter of the Federal Constitution. The arbitral portion of the Act is, in our opinion, perfectly good, subject to its severability from any other portion which may be bad." It was argued that the Industrial Tribunal here was an arbitration tribunal of the same kind as in Australia and exercises similar functions. It is however pertinent to observe that the phraseology employed in section 15 of the Indian Act is different from that used in the Australian statute. The Indian statute has constituted different bodies for different purposes. An Industrial Tribunal has been co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er to make binding and authoritative decisions as to facts is necessarily judicial power. I direct attention to the concluding words--" is called upon to take action." In my opinion these words are directed to action to be taken by a tribunal which has power to give a binding and authoritative decision. The mere giving of the decision is not the action to which the learned Chief Justice referred. If a body which has power to give a binding and authoritative decision is able to take action so as to enforce that decision, then, but only then, according to the definition quoted, all the attributes of judicial power are plainly present. I refer to what I say more in detail hereafter, that the Privy Council, in the Shell case ([1931] A.C. 275.), in which approval was given to the definition quoted, expressly held that a tribunal was not necessarily a Court because it gave decisions (even final decisions) between contending parties which affected their rights. In Huddart Parker's case ( 8 C.L.R. 330 at 383.), Isaacs 1. referred to the statement of Palles C.B. in R.v. Local Government Board for Ireland ([1902] 2 I.R. 349 at p. 373.) "to erect a tribunal into a 'Court' or '....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liability." The concluding words of the passage quoted above at once distinguish the present case from the Australian case. The award given by an Industrial Tribunal in respect either of bonus or higher wages, etc. is enforceable by its own force and by the coercive machienary of the Act and it is not merely a declaration of a character that furnishes a cause of action to the employee to bring a suit on its foot to recover the C.L.R. 482, 512. wages. An arbitral tribunal's decision cannot be enforced unless it has the sanction of a Court of justice behind it but the award of the Tribunal is enforceable under the Act itself by the coercive machinery provided therein. It is the terms of the award that are enforceable and not the terms of the order made by the Government. It is the breach of the terms of the award that is punishable and not any breach of Government's order. The Government itself is bound to declare the award binding and it has no option whatsoever in the matter. It is no doubt true that the tribunal has not only to decide the existing rights and liabilities of the parties and it can lay down rules of conduct for the future but it does so because by law it is auth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as that of a Court of Justice in view of the various provisions to which I have made reference. Reference was also made to certain passages occuring in pages 422 and 428 of Toronto Corporation v. York Corporation ([1938] A.C. &15). That was a case of the Municipal Board of Ontario. It was held there that the Board was merely an administrative tribunal. Next reliance was placed on R.v. National Arbitration Tribunal, Ex-parte Horatio Crowther & Co. Ltd.([1947] A.E.R. 693.). That dealt with the powers of tile National Arbitration Tribunal. In my opinion this citation also is not of much assistance. It was again urged by Mr. Alladi that the word "tribunal" was introduced in the article to provide for cases of tribunals like the Board of Revenue. The suggestion does not appear to be sound, because a Revenue Board has all the attributes of a Court of justice and falls within the definition of the word "Court" in matters where it adjudicates on rights of parties. The word "tribunal" has been used in previous legislation in a number of statutes and it is difficult to think that the Constitution when it introduced this word in article 136 intended to limit it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 23 (b) of the Act has been wrongly construed by it and as a result of this misconstruction persons who were guilty of a wrong and who could not have been reinstated have been reinstated. In brief, the argument was that under section 23(b) when a matter has been referred to a tribunal in respect of an earlier strike, any strike during the pendency of that dispute is an illegal strike and that was the situation here. The employees of the bank had struck work in December, 1948. That dispute had been referred to an Industrial Tribunal. It was during the pendency of that dispute that another strike took place which led to the dismissal of the employees who have now been reinstated by the present award. The Calcutta High Court has held that a strike during the pendency of the period of truce and during the pendency of an earlier dispute before a tribunal is illegal even if it is brought about as a result of fresh and new demands which are not covered by the earlier dispute. One of the members of the Tribunal thought that the decision laid down the law correctly on the point, but the other member thought that the decision was erroneous. Both of them, however, agreed that whether the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bhattacharya on behalf of the employees and distributed by them, which it is alleged considerably shook the credit of the bank. This opportunity was denied to it. It was contended before us that the bank wanted to lead evidence on certain matters and that the opportunity to lead it was denied. There is nothing on the record to support this contention. The result therefore is that the facts on the basis of which allegations of victimization have been made are neither supported by an affidavit nor by any evidence and the award is based on no evidence whatsoever. The Act as well as the rules framed under it contemplate a proper hearing, discovery and inspection of documents and production of evidence, etc. None of this procedure was followed by the Tribunal. It is difficult to see on what material the Tribunal has given its award as there is none existing on the present record and the respondents' counsel could not point out to any such material. At one time during the argument I was inclined to think that possibly both parties by agreement consented to treat the statement of case as evidence in the case and did not wish to produce any other evidence, but the affidavit filed on behalf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t or Tribunal cease to be available at any time the appropriate Government shall, in the case of a chairman, and may in the case of any other member, appoint another independent person to fill the vacancy, and the proceedings shall be continued before the Board, Court or Tribunal so reconstituted." The Tribunal was never reconstituted by the Government by any notification. Under section 7 a Tribunal has to be constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Act by the Government. The Government having constituted a Tribunal of three persons it had power under section 8 to reconstitute it but did not exercise that power. The result therefore is that the Tribunal as originally constituted was not the Tribunal which gave the award in this reference. Only two members have given the award. It was said that one of the members ceased to be available and the Government was not bound to fill up that vacancy. There is no material on the record to prove whether any member became unavailable and if so, when. But even if a member becomes unavailable and the Government does not choose to fill up the vacancy, still the Government has to reconstitute the Tribunal by saying that two membe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by at least two of them." In Fakira's case the order of confirmation was only made, passed and signed by one of them, though the Court of the Resident consisted of two Judges. Their Lordships held that the peremptory provisions of section 377 had not been complied with and that the sentence passed had not been validly confirmed. The appeal was allowed and the case was remitted to the Court of the Resident. The provisions of section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act are also of a peremptory nature. Reference may also be made to a case arising under the Bar Councils Act reported in In re An Advocate, Madras(A.I.R. 1942 Mad. 267.), where one member of the tribunal under that Act had died and had not signed the report. It was held that the tribunal ceased to be properly constituted and that the report could not be considered. For the reasons given above I would quash this award and direct that the Tribunal which is still functioning should readjudge item 18 of the reference and then submit its award on this point to Government. The employees cannot be held responsible for the method of procedure adopted by two members of the Tribunal. Each party will have to bear their own costs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect to the decision of a tribunal which is really a part of the administrative machinery of the Government. In reply to this objection, it has been urged by Sir Tek Chand that the Tribunal constitutedunder the Industrial Disputes Act is really and in substance, a Court or judicial tribunal which is invested with the power and authority to exercise judicial functions; and in any event, the language of article 136 of the Constitution is wide enough to include an appeal from the award or determination of any tribunal, be it judicial or not. There are two questions which require consideration on this preliminary point. The first is, whether the award or decision of an Industrial Tribunal constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act is a judicial decision in the proper sense of the expression or is it the pronouncement of an administrative or quasi-judicial body which may exercise some of the functions of a Court of law but is really not so ? The other question turns upon the construction to be put upon article 136 of the Constitution particularly on the meaning to be given to the words 'tribunal' and 'determination' occurring therein; and the question is whether the language is wide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oever. The decision, it seems, has only a negative value. The Lord Chancellor enumerated a series of negative propositions which stated inter alia that a tribunal is not necessarily a Court because two or more contending parties appear before it, nor because it hears witnesses, or gives a final decision which affects the right of the parties. What the real or positive test is, the Privy Council did not care to formulate, though the judgment quoted, with approval, certain observations of Griffith C.J. given in another Australian case, namely, Huddart Parker & Co. v. Moorehead(8 C.L.R. 330, at p. 357.), which to some extent neutralised the effect of the negative tests enumerated in the judgment. The observations of Griffith C.J. are as follows :-- "I am of opinion that the words 'judicial power'...... mean the power which every sovereign authority must have of necessity to decide controversies between its subjects, or between itself and its subjcets, whether the rights relate to life, liberty or property. The exercise of this power does not begin until some tribunal which has power to give a binding and authoritative decision (whether subject to appeal or not) is called upon to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es operative after it is accepted by the head of the department under which the tribunal conducted its enquiries and it is then enforced by some sort of administrative process; or it might create rights between the parties which have to be sued upon in the ordinary way in a Court of law and it is only on the basis of a judgment or decree that is obtained in such action that relief could be had by the party. The essence of judicial determination is that nothing further remains to be done except the enforcement of the judgment, a step which is compelled automatically by the law of the land. The other fundamental test which distinguishes a judicial from a quasi-judicial or administrative body is that the former decides controversies according to law, while the latter is not bound strictly to follow the law for its decision. The investigation of facts on evidence adduced by the parties may be a common feature in both judicial and quasi-judicial tribunals, but the difference between the two lies in the fact that in a judicial proceeding the Judge has got to apply to the facts found, the law of the land which is fixed and uniform. The quasi-judicial tribunal on the other hand gives its ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...." (1) See Robson's Justice and Administrative Law, p. 74. (2) Vide Committee of Minister's Powers, Minutes of Evd., Vol. II, pages 15-16 and also Robson's Justice and Administrative Law, p. 319. (3) [1937] 2 K.B. 309. In our opinion these statements correctly bring out the distinction between a judicial tribunal and an administrative body which exercises quasi-judicial functions. These being the essential features which distinguish the two classes of tribunals, we would have to ascertain with reference to the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, which class or category of tribunals an Industrial Tribunal comes under. The object of the Industrial Disputes Act, as set out in the preamble, is "to make provisions for investigation and settlement of industrial disputes and for certain other purposes hereinafter appearing." The word "settlement" suggests the idea of establishing compromise between the interests of disputing parties. There are three classes 'of authorities provided for by the Act who are entrusted with the powers and duties of investigation and settlement of industrial disputes. First of all, there are conciliation officers or Boards o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Provincial or Central Legislative Assembly as the case may be and the Legislative Assembly may. by its resolution confirm, modify or reject the award. After the resolution is passed, the Government is to declare the award so confirmed or modified to be binding [see sub-section (3)]. Sub-section (4) of section 15 expressly lays down that an award declared to be binding under any two of the previous sub-sections shall not be called into question in any manner whatsoever. The Government is not merely to declare the award binding but under section 19 (3), it has got to specify the date when the award would come into force and also to fix the period during which it would remain binding, and this period shall not exceed one year. It will be seen, therefore, that there is nothing in the Industrial Disputes Act from which it could be inferred that the Industrial Tribunal really functions as a Court exercising judicial functions. Regarding the trappings or the external indicia of a Court, its i position is almost the same as that of the Board of Conciliation or Court of Enquiry and Bakshi Sir Tek Chand concedes that the latter are not judicial tribunals at all. The powers of an Industri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not judicial process at all. In settling the disputes between the employers and the workmen, the function of the Tribunal is not confined to administration of justice in accordance with law. It can confer rights and privileges on either party which it considers reasonable and proper, though they may not be within the terms of any existing agreement. It has not merely to interpret or give effect to the contractual rights and obligations of the parties. It can create new rights and obligations between them which it considers essential for keeping industrial peace. An industrial dispate as has been said on many occasions is nothing but a trial of strength between the employers on the one hand and the workmen's organization on the other and the Industrial Tribunal has got to arrive at some equitable arrangement for averting strikes and lock-outs which impede production of goods and the industrial development of the country. The Tribunal is not bound by the rigid rules of law. The process it employs is rather an extended form of the process of collective bargaining and is more akin to administrative than to judicial function. In describing the true position of an Industrial Tribunal in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Supreme Court a plenary jurisdiction in the matter of entertaining and hearing appeals by granting of special leave against any kind of judgment, decree or order made by any Court or tribunal in any cause or matter and the powers could be exercised in spite of and overriding the specific provisions for appeal contained in the previous articles. The controversy so far as the present case is concerned mainly centers round the interpretation to be put upon two words, namely, "determination" and "tribunal" used in the article. Does the word "tribunal" mean a judicial tribunal only and is the expression "determination" restricted to what is known as "judicial determination"? Sir Alladi's contention is that in interpreting these words we should follow the principle of ejusdent generis. "Determination," he says, must be taken to be judicial determination which is of the same nature as decree, judgment, order or sentence; and "tribunal" associated with the word" Court" could not but mean "judicial tribunal." Bakshi Sir Tek Chand on the other hand lays stress on the fact that the word "determin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t no appeals could, on any account, be allowed against determinations of such tribunals. There are numerous varieties of these adjudicating bodies, whose structures vary greatly in character and composition and so do the powers and functions which they exercise. The best thing to do would be to examine each type of cases as it arises and if we find that with regard to determinations emanating from certain tribunals it is not possible for us to exercise fully and effectively the powers of an appellate Court, such determinations must be held to lie outside the purview of article 136 of the Constitution. This disability in the matter of exercising our powers as an appellate Court might arise from the fact that the rules and principles by which we ordinarily judge the soundness or otherwise of judicial decisions are not capable of being applied to the determinations of certain administrative tribunals. It might also arise from the fact that the law under which the tribunal functions prevents us from making any effective order which would be binding and operative of its own force without the intervention of some other power or authority; or there may be some kind of contingency attache....