ISSUE:
Whether the Government’s refusal to refer the industrial dispute under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, solely on the ground that workmen resorted to a go-slow strategy, was legally valid?
Whether the discretion of the Government under Section 12(5) is absolute, or must it refer a dispute when a prima facie case for reference exists?
RULE:
The discretion conferred on the Government under Section 12(5) is not absolute and must be exercised on a consideration of relevant facts and circumstances. The Government’s satisfaction that there is no case for reference must be based on legally germane reasons, not punitive or extraneous considerations. The refusal to refer must stem from defects inherent in the dispute, such as it being stale, frivolous, or legally untenable—not from a desire to discipline workmen.
Industrial adjudication serves to resolve disputes, not to punish misconduct. The Government cannot refuse to refer a dispute solely on the ground that the workmen resorted to go-slow tactics. Misconduct may justify disciplinary action by the employer, but it is not a valid reason to deny adjudication of an otherwise legitimate industrial dispute, particularly when the claim (e.g., bonus) is based on financial and economic factors independent of past worker behavior.