The High Court in Kuala Lumpur today quashed the human resources minister's decision to refer the termination of 895 workers by Perwaja Steel Sdn Bhd to the Industrial Court.

In a judicial review application brought by Perwaja Steel, Justice Hanipah Farikullah ruled that the case cannot be heard by the Industrial Court as there is no possibility of reinstatement.

This is because the company's factory in Kemaman, which terminated the workers, had ceased its operations in November 2014, she added.

However, Justice Hanipah stated, the workers can bring up the matter through other methods, but not through the Industrial Court.

"The minister did not take into consideration that there is no possibility of the workers being reinstated.

"In my opinion, the workers were advised wrongly on the issue of procedure. As such, this application is allowed," she said. THowever, the judge ordered no cost against the respondents.

By allowing the application, the Industrial Court is now prohibited from hearing the case.

The courtroom was packed with about 80 former workers. Also present was Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) acting president Abdullah Sani.

It was reported that 1,500 workers were terminated in November 2014 and owed up to four months in salary.

Workers told of Perwaja's financial turmoil

The workers were first informed in June 2014 that their company suffered a financial turmoil and would conduct a restructuring exercise of its operation.

A total of 895 workers made 46 representations to the Industrial Relations Department. Human Resources Minister Richard Riot then referred the matter to the Industrial Court in October 2015.

Perwaja Steel challenged the decision on Dec 28, 2015, and named the minister, Industrial Court and the former workers as respondents.

The company was represented in court by Balan Nair and S Malini, while the workers were represented by Mohan Ramakrishnan. Senior federal counsel Aiyu Rohaizal appeared for the minister.

Mohan, who was disappointed with the judgment, said he feared the decision may lead to a dangerous trend where other companies may wind up their operations when they are faced with a similar situation.

"The judge is saying that there must be a possibility of being reinstated, only then the minister can refer, but that is a wrong perception," he said.

Mohan added that it is up to the Industrial Court, not the minister or the High Court, to decide whether or not to allow reinstatement.

"The minister should have the power to refer the case to Industrial Court.

"She (the judge) does not accept the function of the minister by saying that the case cannot be referred (to the Industrial Court)," he opined.

Mohan said reinstatement is a non-issue, since retired employees can't have their jobs reinstated anyway.

"I will seek further instructions from my clients on whether they want to appeal against the decision," he told reporters outside the courtroom.

Any such appeal to be done has to be filed within 30 days.