Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 181, June 1978

Case No 833 (India) - Complaint date: 11-NOV-75 - Closed

1. 36. The Committee examined this case at its session in November 1976 when it submitted to the Governing Body an interim report contained in paragraphs 276-304 of its 160th Report.
2. 37. Since it last examined the case the Committee has received further communications from the complainant organisation, dated 24 June and 24 December 1977 containing additional information in connection with the complaint. The Committee has also received communications from the Government, dated 7 May 1977 and 9 February 1978, containing the further observations of the Government.
3. 38. India has ratified neither the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 39. When it examined this case in November 1976 the Committee reached conclusions regarding the question of the recognition of the complainant union for the purposes of collective bargaining. The complainants, however, had alleged in addition that many trade unionists and activists had been prosecuted or arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. In particular, it was alleged that many arrests had been made in June 1975 and that the persons arrested had included Mr. S.R. Das, General-Secretary of the complainant union, Mr. A.R. Sarkar, Secretary and Mr. R.N. Singh, President. In this connection the Committee noted that the arrest of Mr. Das and his colleagues under the maintenance of Internal Security Act followed the killing of B.N. Singh, President of the Chittaranjan Block Congress.
2. 40. The complainant had also alleged that one of the Vice Presidents of the Union, Mr. Mihir Kumar Dey, had been murdered on 22 June 1975 and the Committee noted that the circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Dey had not been cleared up.
3. 41. The complainants had also alleged that dismissals were carried out following a strike that had taken place on 20 June 1975 and the Government had pointed out that, purely on the merits of their cases, leave had been granted to some workers for the day in question, and that their situation had, accordingly, been regularised.
4. 42. In the circumstances, the Committee recommended the Governing Body, in connection with the events which surrounded the strike of 20 June 1975, to request the Government;
   • (i) to provide information on the present situation as regards S.R. Das and his colleagues, to state whether proceedings had been instituted against them and, if so, to give the results of such proceedings;
   • (ii) to indicate also whether a thorough investigation had been carried out into the killing of Mihir Kumar Dey and, if in the affirmative, the results of such inquiry; and
   • (iii) to communicate detailed information on the dismissals which were reported to have been carried out following the strike on 20 June 1975.
     • Further communications received from the complainants
   • 43. In its communication of 24 June 1977 the complainant union stated that S.R. Das and other colleagues who had been detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, had been released on 25 May 1977 following the withdrawal of the state of emergency by the new Government. Nevertheless, continued the complainants, a false murder charge was still pending against Mr. Das and he and 29 persons awaited trial.
5. 44. The complainants added that all the leading officials of the union were still out of employment and were under suspension, including the President, two Vice-Presidents, two Secretaries, Executive Committee members and others, making a total of 16 persons. Mr. B.K. Bose, a Vice-President of the union had also been kept out of employment and suspended as a result of a complaint to the company against him by the Chittaranjan Block Congress Committee. This complaint essentially accused Mr. Bose of collecting money from union members for the purpose of buying arms and explosives and carrying out underground activities against the Government. The complainants added that although these charges had not been established during a preliminary inquiry by the administration, Mr. Bose had nevertheless been suspended.
6. 45. As regards the death of Mr. Dey, the complainants stated that no-one had been interrogated and no investigation had been carried out by the authorities, although the murderers were moving freely around the township.
7. 46. The representatives of the union met the new Minister for Railways on 11 April 1977 when they informed him of all the acts of repression endured by the organisation. Even here, added the complainants, the administration denied permission to the union's President to meet the Minister.
8. 47. In its further communication dated 24 December 1977 the complainant organisation stated that, in August, September and October 1977, all of the union leaders and activists had been reinstated following the intervention of the Minister for Railways.
   • Further observations of the Government
9. 48. In a communication dated 2 May 1977 the Government pointed out that the ministry of Railways had indicated that there had been no case in which employees of the Chittaranjan Locomotive Works had been removed or dismissed from service owing to their participation in the strike (Bangla Bandh) on 20 June 1975.
10. 49. In a further communication dated 9 February 1978 the Government stated that, as regards Mr. S.R. Das and his colleagues (28 in number), the Government of West Bengal had indicated that the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, had, on 2 September 1977, remitted the case to the Court of Sessions. The case was still subjudice. The Government mentioned, however, that the order of suspension from duty issued in respect of Mr. Das on 25 June 1977, following his arrest, had been revoked and Mr. Das had joined duty on 25 August 1977.
11. 50. As regards the murder of Mr. Mihir Kumar Dey, the Government stated that the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate by order of 5 October 1977, had requested the Deputy Inspector General of Police to appoint a competent officer to reinvestigate the case. The case was, accordingly, still under investigation.
12. 51. As regards the orders of suspension issued against workers or trade union office bearers in connection with their detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act or because of their arrest in connection with the incidents on 21 June 1975 or for reasons of misconduct, the Government stated that these measures of suspension were not resorted to in an attempt to crush the union. As the complainant union had admitted, continued the Government, all the union leaders and activists had been taken back to duty during August, September and October 1977 at the intervention of the Railway Minister.
13. 52. Mr. B.K. Bose, stated the Government, had been placed under suspension because of a complaint that he was collecting subscriptions from the workers on the shop floor for the "Struggle Fund" of the union. He was later allowed to resume his duties pending an inquiry. The Disciplinary Board concluded that the charges against Mr. Bose could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the proceedings were dropped. The period of suspension was treated as a period of duty and, according to the Government, the case was now settled.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

• Conclusions of the Committee
  53. 53 The Committee notes with interest the Government's statement, confirmed by the complainants, that, following an intervention by the minister for Railways, all the trade union leaders and activists against whom suspension orders had been issued in connection with the events surrounding the strike in June 1975 or who had been detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, resumed their duties in August, September and October 1977.
  54. 54 As regards the detention of the union's General-Secretary, Mr. S.R. Das and a number of other persons under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act in June 1975 for acts prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, the Committee notes that these persons have been released and that judicial proceedings have been instituted against them. These cases have been remitted to the court of Sessions for trial. The Committee trusts that these trials will take place promptly, with all appropriate judicial safeguards, and that the Committee will be informed of the outcome of the proceedings.
  55. 55 The Committee also notes that the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate has ordered a reinvestigation into the murder of Mr. Mihir Kumar Dey, former Vice-President of the complainant union. The Committee would recall in this connection that in cases involving the loss of human life, it has attached special importance to the circumstances being fully investigated in order to ascertain the facts and determine responsibilities. The Committee hopes that the investigation indicated by the Government will be completed in the near future and that the findings will be brought to its attention.
  56. 56 As regards the allegations concerning the suspension of Mr. B.K. Bose the Committee notes that the charges brought against him, as well as the suspension order, have been withdrawn following an inquiry and that the matter has now been settled.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 57. In these circumstances, and with regard to the case as a whole, the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (i) to note, with interest, that the trade unionists who were suspended following a strike in June 1975 have resumed their duties; that the suspension of Mr. B.K. Bose has now been withdrawn following an inquiry into certain charges brought against him; and to decide that these aspects of the case do not call for further examination;
   • (ii) as regards the allegations concerning Mr. S.R. Das and certain other persons, to note that these persons have been released and that judicial proceedings have been instituted against them; that these cases have been remitted to the Court of Sessions for trial; to express the hope that these trials will take place promptly, with all appropriate judicial safeguards; and to request the Government to transmit to the Committee information on the outcome of these proceedings, including the texts of the judgments;
   • (iii) as regards the murder of Mr. Mihir Kumar Dey, to note that a reinvestigation has been ordered; to draw attention to the principle contained in paragraph 55 above concerning the importance of circumstances involving loss of life being fully investigated in order to ascertain the facts and determine responsibilities; and to request the Government to keep the Committee informed of the outcome of the investigation.