The Calcutta High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a practicing Advocate of the High Court seeking a direction to prevent the implementation of “Bandh” called on 10th March, 2023 and 6th April, 2023.
The petitioner appearing in person submitted that on account of strike called by the 4th respondent/ Federation of employees the innocent public are put to serious prejudice and has caused great economic loss to the State which cannot be compensated. The 4th respondent/Federation has given a call for conducting a cease work on the aforementioned dates highlighting the main issue with regard to the dearness allowance.
On 6th April, 2023 when the matter was heard, the Court suggested to the Advocate General that the State Government can consider inviting the office bearers of the 4th respondent/Federation for a dialogue. However, on account of no staff members reporting for duty on the said date, the Court was unable to pen down an order on 6th April, 2023. However, Advocate General was fair enough to state that no written orders need be passed and he will do the needful in the matter.
When the case is taken up on April 17 , the Advocate General has submitted that the State will hold a dialogue with five nominees of the 4th respondent/Federation and on behalf of the State a Committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the Government of West Bengal will be constituted and date will be fixed for conducting the dialogue.
The Court made certain observations as to how the cease work which was conducted on 10th March, 2023 and 6th April, 2023 had affected the functioning of the Court not to say about the other offices of the State Government.
The petitioner submitted that the Government has issued an order that employees who do not report for work will lose their salary and their absence will be treated as break in service.
“We are not here to make any observation in this regard and it is for the State Government to act in accordance with law. We have reasoned out to Mr. Bhaskar Ghosh, convener of the 4th respondent/Federation that the issue relating to the dearness allowance is now pending before the Supreme Court in an appeal filed by the State of West Bengal against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court and it may not augur well for the Federation or its affiliates to call for pen down, strike or cease work, especially when the matter is subjudice before the Supreme Court”, the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice T. S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya observed.
The Bench hoped and trusted that the observation made by the Court will be taken in the right spirit by the 4th respondent/Federation. Without prejudice to the rights of the parties, the representatives of the 4th respondent/Federation are directed by the High Court to participate in the dialogue with the State Government with the Committee constituted by the State Government headed by the Chief Secretary of the Government of West Bengal and whatever discussion is being made during those proceedings will not in any manner impinge upon the rights of the employees or that of the State Government which has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The State Government shall fix a date for the meeting within ten days from date and intimate the convener of the 4th respondent/Federation so that five of its nominees can participate in the meeting on the date, time and place fixed by the Chief Secretary of the Government of West Bengal.
The Advocate appearing for 4th respondent/Federation submitted that the observation made by this Court should not be taken to be a direction on the State Government.
The High Court clarified that it has not issued any direction and had only recorded the submission made by the petitioner pointing out an order passed by the State Government and the observation made by us to the 4th respondent/Federation was to the effect that we hope and trust that the observation would appeal to the 4th respondent/Federation. This clarification is issued in the light of the submissions made by the Advocate for the 4th respondent that right to conduct a peaceful strike is a fundamental right in terms of the relevant Rules framed in the State.