Bombay Union of Journalists v State of Bombay

Facts

• A dispute involving journalists and their employer required examination of whether the state government was obliged to refer the matter for adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act
• The government's discretion in deciding whether to make such a reference, and the standard governing judicial review of a refusal to refer, was at issue

Issue

1. What is the nature of the appropriate government's power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication, and to what extent can courts review a decision declining to make such a reference.

Held

• The Court held that the power to refer a dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act involves the government's subjective satisfaction as to whether an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended
• This subjective satisfaction, however, is not immune from judicial scrutiny; it must be based on relevant material, and a decision that is arbitrary, mala fide, or based on extraneous considerations can be interfered with
• The government is not obliged to make a reference in every case where a party claims a dispute exists; it can decline reference if satisfied, on relevant grounds, that no genuine industrial dispute is made out
• The Court balanced administrative discretion in the reference power against the need to prevent misuse or arbitrary denial of access to the dispute resolution machinery

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate government's power to refer an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, though resting on subjective satisfaction, must be exercised on relevant material and in good faith; an arbitrary or mala fide refusal to refer is amenable to judicial review, even though the government is not bound to refer every claimed dispute.