Unit -1

Concept of Labour through the ages

What are Labour Laws

Labour laws are a set of laws that govern the rights and liabilities of persons employed in an organization and that of
the organization as well. They act as a medium between workers, organizations, and the collectivity of workers i.e
trade unions. They can be divided into two categories, one that governs the relationship between the employer,
employee, and the trade unions; and the second deals with the individual rights of employees. They define rights and
liabilities of workers, trade unions, and employers as well, Labor law entails within its ambit the following:
● Industrial relations – This covers within its ambit the unfair labor practices and working of trade unions.
● Workplace safety – This covers the safety requirements and redressal mechanisms in case of any untoward
incident.
● Employment standards – This covers the layoff procedures, working hour regulations, minimum wages
including a provision regarding leaves.

Requirement of Labour Law

Labour law works on a basic premise that industries are promoters of development and it is in the best interest of the
nations to let them function in a congenial environment, but on the flip side protection of the nation’s workforce is
the sole responsibility of the nation’s governments. Labour laws are also required to assure the workers that their
interests will be protected in case of infringement of their rights.

History of Labour Laws

Labour laws can be traced back to varied parts of the world. European scholars laid emphasis on the importance of
the guilds and apprenticeship systems prevalent in medieval times. On the other hand, Asian scholars trace labour
laws back to the Babylon code (18th century BCE); and on the laws of the Manu as well, Meanwhile American
authors guide us towards the law of the Indies enunciated in Spain in the 17th century for its ramping society.
They were developed as the result of the industrial revolution during the 18th century. It became essential to stop the
unfair treatment meted out to the workers, as the rate at which the industries were going at the cost of labour was a
disaster, on the flip side with the french revolution in the picture, society was moving towards social justice so as the
cumulative result of conflict, labour laws were brought in the 18th century, but in the true sense, they received
acceptance in the 20th century.

Deliberations are undertaken by countries to establish effective Labor Laws

Britain – Whitley commission advocated for industrial councils to be set up throughout the world. A conference was
held in February 1918 attended by the delegates of Britain, France, Belgium, and Italy which championed the cause
for establishing an International labour rights body and easing the diplomatic procedure to benefit the labour.
America – American Federation of Labor published an apolitical report that advocated for strengthening the
collective bargaining process and improving the lives of persons currently engaged in industries.

The build-up to the International Labour Organization

At the end of WWI, two viewpoints emerged to make amends for the future. The International Federation of Trade
Unions (IFTU) called for a meeting in Berne and it advocated changes for the future and had a look at the changes
that were made in the past. The Americans boycotted this meeting, however, some consensus was achieved and
certain demands such as ending wage labour and establishing socialism, along with these demands the IFTU also
advocated for establishing an international body associated with the league of nations that would enforce labour
legislation around the world.
The British advocated for establishing an international parliament that would help in the implementation of labour
laws in countries associated with the league of nations. Each nation would be represented by two of its delegates in
the parliament. An office would be created to collect data on labour issues. Some of the members from the
American side were not convinced about the concept of labour office and recommended that the office should only
be empowered to make recommendations and enforcement should be the forte of the league of nations. The British
vehemently opposed this idea, but the American proposal was adopted. The American side made certain proposals
that were also accepted are as follows:
1. Labour should be treated as human beings and not commodities.
2. The right to minimum wages should be protected.
3. There should be no wage disparity between men and women.
4. Equal pay for equal work.
5. The right to form associations is inherent and should be protected.
6. Child labour below the age of 14 should be abolished.
7. An eight-hour workday or a 40-hour workweek should be the norm across the globe.
8. Six-day working should be an established norm.
9. Foreign workers to be treated on par with domestic workers.
10. Condition of factories should be made habitable and congenial work environments should be pushed.
The final report was submitted by the Commission on 4th March and was adopted on 11th April. The report was an
integral amalgamation of the Treaty of Versailles. The first International labour conference began on 29th October
1919 in Washington DC and adopted the international labour conventions which dealt with the following issues:
● Maximum working hours;
● Benefits for women during the period of maternity;
● Prohibition of women to work in the night; and
● Regulating working hours for the young.
The French socialist, Albert Thomas, became the Director-General. The ILO became a part and parcel of the United
Nations after the League of Nations was abolished.

Labor Laws in India

Labor Laws in India can be further divided into:

During the British raj

The laws were incorporated to benefit the prospects of the business and to adhere to certain norms established by the
International Labour Organization. Here is a list of laws passed during that time:
Factories Act, 1883 – This Act was incorporated by the British to fix certain working conditions such as 8 hours of
working hours, the prohibition of women in night employment, and the abolition of child labour. This Act also
stipulated for overtime wages,
● Trade Disputes Act, 1929– This Act was passed to regulate the relations between the employer, employees,
and the unions of employees. Provisions were inculcated to curb the rights of unions to conduct strikes and
of employers to declare a lockout. This was done to make sure industrial progress is not halted.

After Independence
Independent India was formed on the idea of social justice. Following are certain enactments keeping in mind the
larger objective:
● Factories Act, 1948 – This Act deals with provisions such as working hours, safety, and safety of women
workforce.
● Minimum Wages Act, 1948 – This Act ascertains the minimum wages that have to be paid to skilled and
unskilled workers. The minimum wages have to be proportional to the work undertaken.
● Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – This is one of the most important legislations that intends to promote
industrial peace and harmony and to promote growth. This piece of legislation intends to solve industrial
disputes through arbitration and adjudication.
● Child Labor Prohibition Act- This Act was brought in to fulfil the constitutional objective to prevent
exploitation. The act prevents children below 14 years old from being employed in hazardous jobs.
The interesting point to note is that the labour laws find a mention in the concurrent list of the Constitution, which
means both state and centre can draft and implement laws regarding the same. There are 200 state laws, 40 central
laws, still, that daunting image of a child sleeping on a bag that is being dragged on by a worker will haunt us in the
coming times. An attempt has been made by the central government to combine the various laws into codes.
Following is the list of codes:

Code on wages
The aim of the code was to consolidate various laws on wages and to ease out the payment of wages. The followings
Acts are being combined into one:
1. Payment of Wages Act, 1936;
2. Minimum Wages Act, 1948;
3. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965; and
4. Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.
Certain changes that are being introduced are that Section 6 of the Code empowers the central and the state
governments as well to fix minimum wages for all employees covered by the code, unlike the Minimum Wages Act,
1948, which provided for fixation of minimum wages mentioned in the schedule of the Act. Moreover, under
Section 9 of the Code, the central government will fix the floor wages considering the working conditions of the
workers and the state government cannot fix minimum wages below what the centre has envisaged under the floor
rates.

Code on industrial relations

This code offers certain relaxations, retrenchment, strikes, and lockouts. The followings are the acts brought under
this code:
1. Trade Unions Act, 1926;
2. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946;
3. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Certain changes that are being made is that the definition of the industry, mentioned in the Industrial Disputes Act
under Section 2(p), has been modified and the exceptions mentioned under Section 2(j) have been deleted. Such as
hospitals and dispensaries, educational, scientific, research or training institutions, khadi or village industries. Any
activity that is considered as a profession practised by an individual or body of the individual. Definition of the
industrial dispute under Section 2(k) is also expanded to include within its ambit, discharge, dismissal, retrenchment,
or termination of workers.

Code on social security

This code prescribes social security for workers. It has replaced the following Acts:
1. The Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952;
2. The Employees State Insurance Act, 1948;
3. The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961;
4. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972;
5. The Employees Exchange (Compulsory Notification Of Vacancies) Act, 1959 ;
6. The Employees Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959;
7. The Cine Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981;
8. The Unorganized Workers Social Security Act, 2008; and
9. Employees Compensation Act, 1923.
One of the scintillating features of the code is that now it includes within its ambit gig workers, platform workers,
and unorganized workers. This code envisages protecting the gig workers as well. They are defined as a person who
performs work in an unconventional setup and earns from the relationship outside that of employer-employee This
will probably cover workers who are working for food delivery and e-commerce delivery services. Platform workers
refer to those workers who also cannot be confined to the employee-employer relationship and are employed by
organizations to access other organizations via internet platforms to solve specific problems or provide specific
services.
The code on occupational safety, health, and working conditions
This code prescribes standards for working conditions, health, and safety of working conditions. The code replaces
13 of the previous laws. Some of them are listed below:
1. The Factories Act, 1948;
2. The Mines Act, 1952;
3. Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act,
1996; and
4. The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.
The code empowers the state government as well to exempt any new factory from the provisions of the new code.
The government has also processed mechanisms to ease out-licensing for contracting firms to hire across the
country. And introducing gender parity, The government has granted access to women to work in positions as they
were prohibited earlier.

Conclusion
Through the course of the article, we have tracked the development of labour laws and have given a brief overview
of the latest amendments introduced by the Indian government. With the COVID-19 pandemic wreaking havoc on
the economies around the world, labour laws need to be modified albeit precaution that they do not transform into a
tool for harassment and exploitation.

Trade Unions: History of Trade Union Movement-

The Trade Unions Act, 1926 (Erstwhile Indian Trade Unions Act) defines the term ‘Trade Union’ as any
combination, whether temporary or permanent, formed primarily for the purpose of regulating the relations between
workmen and employers or between workmen and workmen or between employers and employers, or for imposing
restrictive conditions on the conduct of any trade or business, and includes any federation of two or more trade
unions.

In traditional sense trade unions are continuous association of wage-earners for the purpose of maintaining of
improving the conditions of their working lives

Trade unions form a crucial component of the modern industrial system of a country, operating under respective
constitutional mechanisms, adhering to the globally accepted principles laid down by organisations such as ILO.

Why is it in the news and what is its importance?

There have been instances of protest and dissatisfaction among several trade unions regarding changes in Labour
laws and policies introduced by the government in recent years.

Further, different unions have called for Bandh(Blockade) at different points of time, featuring in news regularly. In
this perspective, studying the Trade Unions, their historical development is necessary.

What is the need of trade Unions?

● Representation of collective stand and power of collective bargaining have been important for the growth
of a stable working population across several economies.
● This has also contributed in workers securing better wages, job security, improvement in working
conditions, more equitable sharing of the wealth created by them
● Continuity and support to stated policy has lent stability to the industrial production, and for the protection
of the interest of both the workers and investors or industrialists.
● Right to form a Trade Union is guaranteed as a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (c) of the Indian
Constitution.
History of Labour Unions in India

● The trade unions genesis stemmed from the necessity of the time, protecting and securing the interest,
presenting the collective demands, grievances of the industrial worker, from the second half of the
nineteenth century, with establishment of industries.
● Poor working conditions, undue long working hours were the concerns for the workers.
● Although the Unions formed in the second half of the 19th century, they had limitations in effectively
functioning as trade unions, they nevertheless were effective social unions, presenting the demands
collectively, with an orientation to reform the ills.
● Development of such trade unions was closely in sync with the development of the Industry in India.
● In India, the first trade union came up in Bombay, after the establishment of textile mills in the 1850s.
● Trade unions came up in Calcutta in 1854, with the establishment of Jute Mills.
● Sohrabji Shapuri Bengali and C.P. Mazumdar were the leaders and early pioneers of the labour unions
uprising.
● The first factory Commission set up in 1879 studied the problems of industrial workers.
● First trade union under the leadership of Narayan Meghji Lokhande -‘Bombay Millhands Association’,
founded in 1884, without any funds, office bearers.
● In 1891, The Indian factory Act was passed
● Some other Trade unions are Ahmedabad Weavers (1895), Jute Mills, Calcutta (1896), Bombay Mill
workers (1897) Union.

Characteristics of the unions and the leadership

● The leaders were Social Reformers and Nationalists with political inclination.
● Approaches were welfare centric, and not on their rights.
● Limited presence catering to the regions of industrial hubs, absent across the country.
● Since it was in the nascent stage, concerted goals or long term targets were difficult to find.

The first Organised Trade union era-1918 and ahead.

● The first organized Trade Union in India the Madras Labour Union was established in 1918.
● Followed the organisational principles of the industrialised world.
● The first world war along with increased communication and better awareness of the global players
contributed to the development of the movement.
● Recognised as the early phase of Labour Unionism.
● Some important Unions were -Ahmedabad Textile Labour Association (1917), All India Postal and RMS
Association.
● All India Trade Union Congress is the oldest trade union federation, founded in 1920, under the leadership
of Lala Lajpat Rai, Joseph Baptista, N.M Joshi and Diwan Chaman Lall.
● Lala Lajpat Rai was the first president.

What fuelled the growth of the movement

● High Inflation of costs of basic commodities, affecting workers, and difficult living conditions, standards as
a result of the war.
● Emergence of the Home Rule League, Gandhian ideals and leadership, and prevailing conditions prompted
the leaders of the day to work to address workers’ plight.
● Workers were in need of able leadership to give voice to their demands and lead them in an organised
manner.
● Events at the end of First World war, establishment of ILO, Russian Revolution.

Emerging phases of divergent ideologies-post 1925 era

● Witnessed increase in frequency of militancy and revolutionary activities,

● Divergence in movement due to breaking factions.
 ● Emergence of leadership like V V Giri, N M Joshi to moderate the movement ,trying to bring it back to
mainstream.
● AITUC broke away forming factions – National Trade Union Federation (NTUF) and All India Red Trade
Union Congress (AIRTUC), later they were merged again.
● Legislative measures such as Trade Unions Act, 1926 and the Trade Disputes Act, 1929 propelled the
growth of trade union associations, allowing rights in exchange of obligations.

Joining the National Narrative-post 1935 era

● Enhanced unity among different trade unions.

● Political influence and leverage of the Indian National Congress across different states led to growth and
emergence of multiple organisations in this sphere.
● Legislative measures were adopted to confer power and recognition to different trade unions.
● The government of the day strived to promote industry on one hand while protecting the interest of the
workers.
● Focus on securing wage and improved living conditions.
● This era is also marked by resentment among unions for suppression of their protests as a law and order
issue by the state machinery, instead of reconciliation and workable resolution.

World war – II and a new era in Labour Movement

● The World War-2 further deteriorated the standard of living , coupled with skyrocketing inflation of
common commodities
● Communists and the Congress witnessed a rift on the question of the War.
● Movement came out stronger as this War affected the common populace very adversely.
● Introduction of Industrial Employment Act, 1946 and Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 marked an
emergence and further strengthening of the Trade union movements.
● The movements also lent their voice to the national struggle and identified themselves as a crucial player in
the national Struggle.

The Age of Post Independence-

● In the Post independence the Trade unions were more influenced by regional or national political
affiliations, thereby blurring their own position with respect to the primary concerns of the workers.
● Witnessed rapid increase in numbers of trade Unions formed.
● Indian National Trade Union Congress was formed in 1947
● Post liberalization the influence has attenuated to certain extent, coupled with privatisation of the economy.
● Labour code and minimum wage are still some demands remaining as contentious issues to be addressed.
● Hind Mazdoor Sabha was formed in 1948
● Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh was founded in 1955
● Although the four decades post independence has witnessed some prominent labour union protests, post
liberalization has somewhat seemingly affected its acceptance among the common public.
● Further increase in unorganised sectors of the Economy due to various reasons has led to increase in the
membership base of the unions.

Some challenges faced by the Trade Unions in the Post Independence era

● Limited Financial Resources due to the membership fee being very low. It limits their ability to mobilize
financial resources.
● With concentration in large cities, dominated by organised sectors, rural agricultural labour is left out and
not adequately given space.
● Although the unions have registered growth in membership, large numbers of labours are not part of the
groups, thereby weakening their collective bargain potential
● Dwindling support base among public post liberalization,
 ● Weak organisational structure and lack of clarity to deal with different labour groups.
● Political ambitions and priorities of the leadership have trumped the concerns and interests of the labourers,
further weakening the bargaining power.
● Weakening of bargaining power due to similar fractions and easy influence by groups with a counter
narrative, driving a wedge among labour unions unity.
● Lack of unity among labour unions, and resultant competitions for better share, which further puts them in
disadvantage to put forth their demands.
● Question of recognition of the unions, where a favourable group may be given a priority sidelining the
genuine or major groups.

The Importance of Labour Unions post Liberalization

● Their existence is essential to safeguard the collective interest of the labourers drawing a fine balance with
the investor’s interests.
● Role in ensuring adoption of ethical business practices.
● Garnering and mobilising support for the interests of the labour class.
● Strengthening the collective bargain capacity of the labour class.

Recent reforms to bring Labour Code- Contentions

Labour is a subject in the Concurrent List of the Constitution of India. The government in the recent past has
envisaged bringing in new labour codes unifying various bills, provisions, broadly categorized into four different
areas, dealing with Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions, Social security, Industrial Relations,
Wages. These four labour codes will rationalise 44 central labour laws.

Code on Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions

● Code on Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions seeks to replace legislation like the Factories
Act, the Mines Act and the Dock Workers (Safety, Health and Welfare) Act.
● In this Code, the security of interests of workers engaged in factories, mines, plantations, motor transport
sector, beedi and cigar workers, contract and migrant workers has been ensured.
● This certainly expected to enhance the industrial safety aspects of the country.
● Various provisions in the code are expected to ease the lives of the Inter-State Migrant Workers by
addressing anomalies of the Inter-State Migrant Workers Act, 1979
● Under the new provisions labourers can now register themselves as Inter-State Migrant Workers on the
national portal, whereas earlier, only contractor appointed ones were allowed to do so.
● Provides the worker a legal identity, enabling them to get benefits of all social security schemes.
● Providing appointment letters to the workers is mandatory.
● Mandatory, free annual health check-up of the workers provided by the employers.
● For a worker engaged in building and other construction work in one State and moving to another State,
benefits from the Building and other Construction Workers’ Cess funds are to be provided.
● Under the “One Nation – One Ration Card”, an Inter-State Migrant Worker would get ration facility in the
State he is working in, while remaining members of his family would be able to avail of the ration facility
in the State of their residence.
● Provision of mandatory helpline facility in every State for resolution of Inter-State Migrant Workers’
grievances.
● National database to be created for the Inter- State Migrant Workers
● Instead of 240 days, a worker having worked 180 days is entitled for one-day leave for every 20 days of
work done.
● Right to women workers to work in all types of establishments
● Women were granted the right to work at night with their consent, further ensuring that the employer would
make adequate arrangements to provide safety and facilities to women workers at night.
● The Maternity Benefit Act was amended to increase the paid Maternity leave for women workers from 12
to 26 weeks.
● Ensure mandatory crèche facility in all establishments having 50 or more workers
Code on social security

● Seeks to amalgamate laws such as the Maternity Benefits Act , Employees’ State Insurance Corporation
Act , Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, Building and Other Construction
Workers Act and the Employees’ Compensation Act.
● It looks to secure the rights of workers for insurance, pension, gratuity, maternity benefit etc.
● Seeks to evolve a comprehensive legal framework for Social Security so that workers can receive social
security completely.
● Under this, in a stepwise manner, a system is to be institutionalized for the contributions received from
employer and worker.
● The Government can fund the contribution of workers from disadvantaged sections.

Code on Industrial Relations

● The Labour Code on Industrial Relations seeks to unify Trade Unions Act, 1926, the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
● Seeks to abolish deadlocks, by promoting labour welfare.
● Looks to give fillip to investment, facilitating the environment for such activities.
● Seeks to empower the labour unions to protect labour interests.

Code on wages

● Unifies the Payment of Wages Act, Equal Remuneration Act. , Payment of Bonus Act, Minimum Wages
Act.
● Evolving Minimum wage for the laborers.
● Provision to account for the regional diversities

Conclusion
The history of trade unionism has undergone change catering to the needs and necessities of their time , and
challenges the labour force faced. The participation of trade unions in the process of development of our nation,
especially industry and social sector of the inhabiting states are well recognised. An environment giving space to the
valid concerns and demands of the unions , simultaneously protecting the investors interest, and facilitating the ease
of doing business parameters are hallmarks of our thriving economy, set on democratic principles. A strong and
robust , active trade union is an antidote to rising disparity of incomes, labour standards and securing interests of the
labourers, and promoting adoption of ethical business practices.

There is no denial of the fact that reforms to various labour laws were long overdue. However, the need to strike a
balance between reform for labour welfare and interests of the investors for faster growth can’t be overlooked. The
labour laws for their Far-reaching effects, require greater deliberation among all the stakeholders for further policy
directions. This will propel India to a world class manufacturing-led growth trajectory, making India truly
‘Atmanirbhar’ and making the make in India program great again.

Movement-The Trade unions according to Industrial Relations code, 2020-

Introduction

The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 is one of the four major Labour Codes that is part of the largest reform scheme
of the Central Government in decades. It includes three main core laws that relate to the settlement of labour
disputes and collective bargaining agreements, namely:
1. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
2. The Trade Unions Act, 1926
3. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
The aforementioned laws were passed for different purposes and objectives; however, their broad area of concern is
similar. The Industrial Dispute Act of 1947 was intended to provide workers with a mechanism that would provide
relief against layoffs, downsizing and wrongful termination that is against the letter of the law. It also sought to
foster healthy labour relations by minimizing the scope for illegal strikes and lockouts and penalizing unfair labour
practices. Therefore, it provided a dispute resolution mechanism, as well as restrictions on layoffs, downsizing and
lockouts to ensure that collective bargaining can take place in a pleasant environment.

The Trade Unions Act of 1926 aimed to provide workers with better working conditions, better wages, protection
against abusive employment, a fair share of company profits, and to this end, allowed workers to realize their right
to form an association, as well as collective negotiation. It facilitated the organization of workers unions and allowed
greater participation of the workforce in the management of an establishment. The purpose of the Industrial
Employment (standing order) Act,1946, is to have it at the plant level and other commercial establishments, to
regulate industrial relations. This regulates the conditions of employment, grievances, misconduct etc. of the
workers employed in the Industry.

Salient features of Industrial Relations Code, 2020

The key changes brought in by the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 can be summed up as follows:-
1. The definition of worker has been broadened and now includes working journalists as defined in Section
2(f) of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act of 1955 and employees of Sales promotion as defined in Section 2(d) of the
Sales Promotion Employees (Terms of Service) Act 1976. Persons employed in a supervisory capacity
earning less than Rs. 18,000 per month (or any amount notified by the Central Government) is included in
the definition of “worker”.
2. Fixed-term employment has a legal basis, unlike the current scheme in which video notifications from
various state governments were introduced. It allows employers greater flexibility to hire in line with
supply and demand. Fixed-term employees are eligible to receive tips on a pro-rata basis if they serve for
one year under their respective employment contracts. They are given equality with permanent employees
concerning working conditions, wages, allowances, and other benefits.
3. The applicability threshold of the Labour Disputes (Regulation) Act 1947 under the Labour Relations Bill
2019 had been established in establishments employing 100 or more employees. However, the 2020
Industrial Relations Code has raised this threshold to 300 and has given the “appropriate government” the
power to exempt any industrial establishment or class thereof from all or some of the provisions of the
Code.
4. Regarding trade union law, the Code establishes that when there is more than one union in an
establishment, the status of the only bargaining union will be granted to the one with 51% of the employees
as members. This threshold is a marked decrease from the 75% threshold that was established in the 2019
bill.
5. There is also a provision for the establishment of the constitution of a bargaining council where there is not
a single union that meets the 51% threshold as mentioned above. In such cases, the council is made up of
representatives of the various unions as long as they have at least 20% of employees as members.
6. Concerning layoffs and reductions in personnel, Section 65 applies to industrial establishments that are not
included in Chapter X of the Code, which is essentially Chapter VB of the Industrial Dispute Act of 1947.
It applies to industrial establishments in which more than fifty workers are working on average per working
day during the previous calendar year.
7. Section 77 of Chapter X applies to industrial establishments in which no less than 300 workers or a greater
number of workers than may be specified by the corresponding government, were employed on average per
working day in the previous 12 months. Therefore, the establishments included in this provision must
obtain prior permission from the Government for layoffs, staff reductions and closure.
8. The Code forbids strikes and immediate lockouts in all companies and therefore no company can strike
contrary to the contract 60 days before the strike or the expiry of a date specified in the strike notification.
Strikes are also prohibited while mediation is in progress and within 7 days of the conclusion of such a
process. Strikes are also prohibited while proceedings are pending before a labour court or 60 days after
they are concluded. The Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 contained similar provisions, but only applied to
public utilities.
Trade Union: negotiating union & negotiating council
The Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides a new concept for negotiating trade unions or negotiating councils in
an industrial company. According to the stated provision:
1. In the case of a single union in an industrial company, the employer recognizes that union as the sole
bargaining union of the workers.
2. If there are several unions, the union is recognized by the employer as a bargaining union with 51% of the
employees in the industrial company’s model directory.
3. In the case of several trade unions, none of which fulfil the above-mentioned 51% membership criteria, the
employer forms a negotiating council made up of representatives of these registered trade unions, who are
supported by at least 20% of the total workforce of the industrial company (1 representative for every 20
%).
4. Industrial Relations Code 2020 also provides that if the central / state government believes that there is a
need for a union or confederation to be recognized as a central / state union, that government may
recognize the trade unions alike.

Strikes and lockouts

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 defines “strike” as including the concerted casual vacation on a given day
of fifty percent or more of the workers in an industry.
2. No employee can strike without reporting a strike to the employer 14 days in advance. This notification is
valid for a maximum of 60 days.
3. Likewise, no employer can lockout one of its employees without giving 14 days notice of the lockout. This
notification is valid for a maximum of 60 days.
4. In addition, Industrial Relations Code 2020 prohibits strikes and lockouts:
(i) during and up to seven days after arbitration; and
(ii) during and up to sixty days after or before trial in a court or arbitrator
(iii) during any period in which a settlement or arbitration award is in effect.
5. Employers are required to report to the relevant government and arbitration officer within five days of
receiving/announcing a strike/lockout.

Standing orders
1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 states that the provisions regarding standing orders will apply to the
establishments that have had three hundred or more employees on any day in the preceding twelve months
or a year.
2. An employer will be required to prepare a draft of standing orders, based on the Central Government model
standing order, within 6 months from the code start date, in consultation with recognized bargaining unions
or members of the negotiating council concerning the same and it must be certified by the certifying
officer.

Re-skilling funds
Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides for the creation of a “reskilling fund” for employees laid off from the
industrial establishment by the employer. The fund will be made up of the following amounts:
1. Employer contribution, equivalent to 15 days of salary as the last retirement of the worker immediately
before being fired.
2. Contributions from other sources as prescribed.
The fund must be used to pay the last 15 days of salary extracted by the worker, to his account, within 45 days after
the worker’s dismissal.
Layoff and retrenchment
1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 defines lay-off as the inability of an employer, due to shortage of coal, or
power, material or breakdown of machinery, accumulation of material or natural calamity from giving
employment to a worker whose name is on the muster roll and has not been retrenched.
2. Retrenchment refers to the termination of service of a workman for any reason other than disciplinary
action. It does not include retirement, non-renewal of contract, or completion of tenure of fixed-term
employment or termination on the ground of continued ill-health.
3. The provisions on lay-off and retrenchment under Industrial Relations Code 2020 do not apply to industrial
establishments with less than 50 workers on an average per working day or seasonal industrial
establishments.
4. Employers are required to give to every worker who has completed at least one year of continuous service:
(i) 50% of basic wages and dearness allowance if he is laid off, and
(ii) one month’s notice (or equivalent wages) and 15 days’ wages for every year of continuous service for such a
period to a worker who has been retrenched.
5. Further, factories, mines and plantations, which have three hundred or more workers must take prior
permission of the appropriate Government before lay-off, retrenchment and closure.

Power of government to reject or modify the tribunal award

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides that the government may, in certain circumstances, postpone
enforcement of arbitral awards made by the tribunals for public reasons that threaten the national economy
or social justice.
2. The Industrial Dispute Act,1947 contained similar provisions. In 2011, the Madras High Court (confirming
a 1997 ruling by the Andhra Pradesh High Court) overturned these provisions on constitutional grounds,
ruling that the power of the executive branch to refuse or change the execution of an arbitral award ruled it
to be the executive branch makes it possible to appeal the decision of the tribunal and thus violates the
separation of powers between the executive and judiciary, which is part of the basic structure of the
constitution.

Grievance Redressal Mechanism

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 states that any industrial establishment employing more than 20 employees
must have one or more complaint redressal committees for the resolution of disputes arising from
individual complaints.
2. The committee should be made up of an equal number of members representing employers and workers,
and the chair should be elected, alternately, from among employees and workers, on a rotating basis each
year.
3. The number of grievance redress committees cannot exceed 10 and there must be adequate representation
of female workers on the committee and must not be less than the proportion of women employed in the
industrial establishment.

Conclusion
An industry can grow only when there is peace and harmony in the industrial environment and it is only possible
when there is a union in an industry. Having a union in the workplace or any industry is very important. An industry
needs to keep its work going so that the needs of the nation can be met and the economy can thrive. If there is no
coordination between the employees and the employers, or if there is some conflict between them, this can also
affect the economy of the nation. Therefore, it is important to have a union in all workplaces. The union helps to
have effective communication between workers and management. They provide special support to workers in a
small platform to hold their opinion and raise the issue they face in the workplace. It also ensures that the workers,
both men and women who work there, are protected and do not face any kind of malicious or unpleasant activity.
Concluding this, my opinion is that having a Labour Relations Code is important to protect the interest of the worker
so that they do not feel neglected and do not have to worry about the workload or the disqualification of their place
with another person. Labour law was always important legislation that was not recognized for a long time, although
there are laws, they are not enough to protect the interests of workers and employers. Therefore, having a new 2020
Labour Relations Code has helped workers secure their rights and maintain peace in the workplace.

Or

INTRODUCTION The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 provides a broader framework to protect the rights
of workers to make unions, to reduce the friction between the employers, and workers and to provide
regulations for settlement of industrial disputes. The Code is prepared after amalgamating, simplifying and
repealing following 3 central labour acts: i. The Trade Unions Act, 1926 ii. The Industrial Employment
(Standing Orders) Act, 1946 iii. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 SCOPE & APPLICABILITY The Code is
designed to consolidate & amend the laws regarding Trade Unions, conditions of employment in Industrial
establishment or undertaking, and sleek settlement of industrial disputes. The code regulates the subsequent
areas: • Registration of Trade Union • Cancellation of Trade Union • Alteration of Name of Trade Union •
Formation of Work Committee • Incorporation of a Registered Trade Union • Recognition of Negotiating
Union • Preparation of Standing Order • Register of Standing Order • Constitution of Industrial Tribunal •
Illegal Strikes and Lock-outs • Procedure for Retrenchment and Re-employment of Retrenched Worker •
Compensation to Workers in case of Transfer of Establishment • Prohibition of Lay-off • Closure of an
Industrial Establishment OBJECTIVE • The Code designated to safeguard the rights of employers and
employees by providing easy labour reforms and to facilitate ease of Doing Business. • The object of the Code
is to realize industrial peace and harmony as the ultimate pursuit in resolving industrial disputes and to
advance the progress of industry by bringing about the existence of harmony and cordial relationship
between the employers and workers. KEY DEFINITIONS • Industry means any systematic activity carried
on by co-operation between an employer and for the production, supply or distribution of goods or services
with a view to satisfy human wants or wishes, whether or not: I. any capital has been invested for the purpose
of carrying on such activity II. such activity is carried on with a motive to make any gain or profit, but does
not include: III. institutions owned or managed by organizations wholly or substantially engaged in any
charitable, social or philanthropic service IV. any activity of the appropriate Government relatable to the
sovereign functions of the appropriate Government including all the activities carried on by the departments
of the Central Government dealing with defense research, atomic energy and space any domestic service. V.
any other activity as may be notified by the Central Government. THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS CODE,
2020 Z Data Source: Labour Ministry & leading publications • Employer means a person who employs,
whether directly or through any person, or on his behalf or on behalf of any person, one or more employee or
worker in his establishment and where the establishment is carried on by any department of the Central
Government or the State Government, the authority specified by the head of the department in this behalf or
where no authority is so specified, the head of the department, and in relation to an establishment carried on
by a local authority, the chief executive of that authority, and includes: I. in relation to an establishment
which is a factory, the occupier of the factory, II. where a person has been named as a manager of the factory
III. in relation to any other establishment, the person who, or the authority which has ultimate control over
the affairs or the establishment and where the said affairs are entrusted to a manager or managing director,
such manager or managing director; contractor and legal representative of a deceased employer. • Employee
means any person other than an apprentice engaged under Apprentices Act, 1961 employed by an industrial
establishment to do any skilled, semi-skilled or unskilled, manual, operational, supervisory, managerial,
administrative, technical or clerical work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or
implied, and also includes a person declared to be an employee by the appropriate Government, but does not
include any member of the Armed Forces of the Union. • Worker means any person except an apprentice
employed in any industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory
work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied and includes working
journalists, and includes any such person who has been, dismissed, discharged or retrenched or otherwise
terminated in connection with or as a consequence of, that dispute, or whose dismissal, discharge or
retrenchment has led to that dispute, but does not include any such person: I. who is subject to the Air Force
Act, 1950, or the Army Act, 1950, or the Navy Act, 1957 II. who is employed in the police service or as an
officer or other employee of a prison; or III. who is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative
capacity IV. who is employed in a supervisory capacity drawing wage of exceeding eighteen thousand rupees
(INR 18,000) per month or an amount as may be notified by the Central Government from time to time. •
Trade Union means any combination, whether temporary or permanent, formed primarily for the purpose of
regulating the relations between workers and employers or between workers and workers, or between
employers and employers, or for imposing restrictive conditions on the conduct of any trade or business, and
includes any federation of two or more Trade Unions. • Retrenchment means termination by the employer of
the service of a worker for any reason whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of
disciplinary action, but does not include: I. voluntary retirement of the worker II. retirement of the worker
on reaching the age of superannuation III. termination of the service of the worker as a result of the non-
renewal of the contract of employment between the employer. • Standing orders means orders relating to
matters setout in the First Schedule. REGISTRATION OF TRADE UNION • Any seven or more members of
a trade union by subscribing to their names, apply for registration to the Authority according to Rules of the
Trade Union. • At least ten percent of the workers or 100 workers, whichever is less, must be the members of
the Trade Union on the date of making an application for registration. • Registered Trade Union shall
continue to have at least ten percent of the workers or one hundred workers, whichever is less. • If the name
of the Trade Union proposed to be registered is identical with an existing registered Trade Union, alteration
of the name is required as asked by the Registrar of Trade Union. • Registered Trade Union shall be a body
incorporate by the registered name, having a common seal and perpetual succession with the power to hold
property. CONSTITUTION OF WORK COMMITTEE Industrial Establishment having or employed 100 or
more workers during a period of 12 months, may be required to constitute a Work Committee to promote
protective measures for securing and preserving sensible relations between the employer and workers.
RECOGNITION OF NEGOTIATING TRADE UNION • For a Registered trade union, there shall be a
negotiating union or council to negotiate with the employer of the Industrial Establishment. • If only one
Trade Union of workers registered in an industrial establishment then the employer of such industrial
establishment shall recognize such Trade Union as the sole negotiating union of the workers. • If more than
one Trade Union of registered workers in an Industrial Establishment then at least fifty-one percent or more
of workers on the muster roll of that Industrial Establishment will be recognized as the sole negotiating union
by the employer. GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL COMMITTEE Industrial Establishment having 20 or more
workers shall constitute one or more Grievance Redressal Committees with the maximum 10 members for
resolution of disputes arising out of individual grievances. Data Source: Labour Ministry & leading
publications STANDING ORDERS Industrial Establishment having or employed 300 or more workers on
any day of during the period of 12 months, must prepare the standing orders on the following matters: •
Classification of workers • Manner of intimating to workers for hours of work holidays, pay-days and wage
rates • Shift Working • Attendance • Conditions and procedure of leave and holidays • Requirement to enter
premises by certain gates, and liability to search. STRIKES AND LOCK-OUTS Every person employed in an
Industrial Establishment is prohibited for strikes and lock-out, in breach of contract: • without giving 60 days
advance notice of strikes and lock-out to the employer • within fourteen days of giving such notice; or • before
the expiry of the date of strikes and lock-out specified in any such notice; or • during the pendency of any
conciliation proceedings before a conciliation officer and seven days after the conclusion of such proceedings;
or • during the pendency of arbitration proceedings before an arbitrator & 60 days after conclusion of such
proceedings CHANGE IN THE CONDITIONS OF SERVICE The employer is required to send a notice of
change in the conditions of service in the following matters, to the workers being affected: • wages,
compensatory and other allowances • contribution paid, or payable, by the employer to any provident fund or
pension fund or for the benefit of workers under any law for the time being in force • hours of work and rest
intervals • leave with wages and holidays • starting, alteration, or ending of shift operating otherwise than in
accordance with standing orders • classification by grades • withdrawal of any customary concession or
privilege or modification in usage • introduction of recent provisions for discipline, or alteration of existing
rules, except in so far as they are provided in standing orders • rationalization, standardization, or
improvement of plant or technique that is likely to lead to retrenchment of workers any increase or reduction
in the no of persons employed or to be employed in any occupation or process or department or shift, not
occasioned by circumstances over which the employer has no control. RETRENCHMENT • Provides
procedures for the retrenchment of workers and the re-employment of the retrenched worker. • For the
retrenchment, the employer must either give three months’ notice or pay the retrenched worker in lieu of the
notice period • Where any worker is retrenched and the employer proposes to take into his employment any
person within one year of such retrenchment, an opportunity will be given to the retrenched workers who are
citizens of India to offer themselves for re-employment. LAY-OFF Lay-off is the inability of an employer
from giving employment to a worker due to multiple factors such as shortage of coal, power, or breakdown of
machinery. Non-seasonal industrial establishment (i.e. mines, factories, and plantations) with 50 to 300
workers is required to: • pay 50% of basic wages and dearness allowance to a worker who has been laid off •
give one month’s notice or wages for the notice period to the retrenched worker. • non-seasonal industrial
establishments with at least 300 workers is required to take prior approval from central or state government
before lay-off, retrenchment or closure • prior approval before lay-off, retrenchment or closure is required by
the non-seasonal Industrial Establishments with at least 300 workers, from central or state government.
CLOSURE • Employer intending closure of an Industrial Establishment is required to serve 60 days advance
notice to the Government. • Provision for compensation in case of Closure to those workers who are in a
continuous period of service not less than one year. EXEMPTIONS The Code provides that the central or
state government may exempt any new establishment or a class of new establishment from all or any
provisions of the Code in the public interest. KEY HIGHLIGHTS • Gratuity for Fixed Term Employee •
Statutory Benefits like ESI, PF, Bonus, Wages for Fixed term Employee • Definitions modified • 14 days’
advance notice before strike by Trade Union • Increased threshold for standing order from 100 to 300
workers • Introduced Dispute Resolution Tribunal • Setting up a Re-skilled Fund for Workers • Hiring and
Firing Provisions # EARLIER PROVISIONS NEW PROVISIONS 1 Definitions i. Employee. Fixed-term
employment was not defined in any of the Act ii. Changes in definitions of Strike, wages, Industrial Dispute,
Lay off iii. Workman was defined in the Industrial Dispute Act i. New Definition of Employee, fixed term
employment introduced ii. Definition of Strike has been amended to mass casual leave by 50% or more
workers on a given day, while the definition of Wages kept aligned with other Labour code iii. Workman now
renamed as the worker 2 Sec-9.C of the Industrial Dispute Act, the workman need not raise its grievance to
the committee before moving to a conciliation officer Grievance Redressal Committee is mandate under
Industrial Relations Code, 2020 3 No provision for “Negotiating Union” Recognition of “Negotiating Union”
is mandatory 4 Standing Orders i. Only the Industrial Establishments defined under the Industrial
Establishment Standing Order Act required to formulate standing orders ii. Threshold for applicability of
standing order was on having100 or more workers i. The code defines an Industrial Establishment as defined
under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 ii. Therefore, unless specifically notified under the Payment of Wages
Act, the provisions of the code do not apply to an industrial establishment, except railways, establishment of a
contractor of an industrial establishment and factories iii. Threshold increased up to 300 workers 5 No time
limit mentioned for completing the disciplinary proceedings against the worker Investigation and inquiry
have to be completed within 90 days from the date of suspension of a worker 6 Resolution of Industrial
dispute use to be done by only one member Tribunal under Industrial Dispute Act The mechanism for the
resolution of industrial disputes introduced under the Industrial Relations Code Now the Industrial tribunal
will consist of two members out of whom one shall be a judicial member and the other will be an
administrative member 7 Prior Notice condition was only applicable to public utility service industries 14
days prior notice before strike mandated for all industrial establishments 8 No concept for worker re-skilling
fund Chapter XI introduced around worker re-skilling fund. According to the provision, the employer will be
required to deposit an amount equal to fifteen days last drawn wages of every retrenched worker 9 No
provision existed for Fixed-term Employment. Employers often enter into a contract with employees for the
short term, but the same was not regulated Fixed-term Employment Introduced, which refers to workers
employed for a fixed duration based on a contract signed between the worker and employer 10 Penalties: For
failure to certify standing orders or the modifications to the same and comply with the finally certified
standing orders, fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, and in the case of a continuing offence with a
further fine which may extend to INR 200 for every day after the first during which the offence continues.
Penalties are more stringent now. • Up to INR 2,00,000. • In case of non-certification of standing orders, an
additional fine of INR 2,000 per day during which the contravention continues. • In subsequent contravention
of the finally certified standing orders, fine up to INR 4,00,000 and imprisonment for a term up to 3 months,
or both

Registration-Rights and Liabilities Of Registered Trade Union-

The protection of workers' rights is made possible in large part by trade unions. The trade unions have been given a
few rights and obligations to help achieve this. The Industrial Revolution began in Europe in the early 1700's and
continued until the 1900's.

The economy was changing from agriculture to one dominated by machinery and manufacturing. It was also a
historical period filled with scientific discoveries and inventions, when the concept of industry was born and various
forms of technology were created. All of this has led to standardization of production processes and manufactured
goods.
Since India was a British colony during the industrial revolution, the same type of trade was carried out in India.
While Europeans came to India primarily in search of raw materials, India soon became a market for finished goods
and a source of cheap labor under the British system.

This began the exploitation of labor, especially in nascent industries such as textiles, jute, cotton, and railroads. The
need to give workers a voice led to the formation of the first union in India in 1851, when the Bombay Textile Mills
were established. At the same time, in 1954, a union was formed at a jute mill in Calcutta.

Trade unions must register to assert their rights and have legal status. Sections 3-14[ii] of the foregoing law describe
the procedure by which trade unions are registered. When registering a trade union under Section 8 , the Registrar
shall issue a certificate of registration in the form prescribed, conclusive proof that the trade union is duly registered
under this Act. Chapter 3 of the act shows the rights and liability of trade unions.

Sections Related To Rights And Liabilities Of Registered Trade Union

After registration, trade unions receive certain rights and privileges. The rights guaranteed to the registered trade
unions and their liabilities are provided in chapter 3 from section 15 to 28 of the Trade Union act, 1926.

Sec 15. Objects on which general funds may be spent.

16. Constitution of a separate fund for political purposes.

17. Criminal conspiracy in trade disputes.

18. Immunity from civil suit in certain cases.

19. Enforceability of agreements.

20. Right to inspect books of trade unions.

21. Rights of minors to membership of trade unions.

21.A. Disqualifications of office-bearers of trade unions.

22. Proportion of office bearers to be connected with the industry.

23.. Change of name.

24. Amalgamation of trade unions.

25. Notice of change of name or amalgamation.

26. Effects of change of name and of amalgamation.

27. Dissolution.

28. Returns

Section 15: Objects on which general funds may be spent. -The general funds of a Registered Trade Union shall not
be spent on any other objects than the following namely:
1. The payment of salaries, allowances and expenses to [office-bearers) of the Trade Union;
2. The payment of expenses for the administration of the Trade Union including audit of the accounts of the
general funds of the Trade Union;
 3. The prosecution or defence of any legal proceeding to which the Trade Union or any member thereof is a
party, when such prosecution of defence is undertaken for the purpose of securing or protecting any ng of
the Trade Union as such or any rights arising out of the relations of any member with his employer or with
a person whom the member employs;
4. The conduct of trade disputes on behalf of the Trade Union of member thereof;
5. The compensation of members for loss arising out of trade disputes;
6. Allowances to members of their dependents on account of death, old age sickness, accidents or
unemployment of such members;
7. The issue of, or the undertaking of liability under, policies of assurance on the lives of members, or under
policies insuring members against sickness, accident or unemployment.
8. The provision of educational, social or religious benefits for members (including the payment of the
expenses of funeral or religious ceremonies for deceased members) or for the dependants of members;
9. The upkeep of a periodical published mainly for the purpose of discussing questions affecting employers or
workmen as such;
10. The payment, in furtherance of any of the objects on which the general funds of the Trade Union may be
spent, of contributions to any cause intended to benefit workmen in general, provided that the expenditure
in respect of such contributions in any financial year shall not at any time during that year be in excess of
one-fourth of the combined total of the gross income which has up to that time accrued to the general funds
of the Trade Union during that year and of the balance at the credit of those funds at the commencement of
that year; and
11. Subject to any conditions contained in the notification, any other object notified by the [appropriate
Government] in the (Official Gazette).]

Section 16: Constitution of a separate fund for political purposes:

1. A Trade Union may constitute a separate fund, from contributions separately levied for or made to that
fund, from which payments may be made, for the promotion of the civic and political interests of its
members, in furtherance of any of the objects specified in sub-section (2).

2. The objects referred to in sub-section (1) are:

1. The payment of any expenses incurred, either directly or indirectly, by a candidate or prospective
candidate for election as a member of any legislative body constituted under [the Constitution] or
of any local authority, before, during, or after the election in connection with his candidature or
election; or

2. The holding of any meeting or the distribution of any literature or documents in support of any
such candidate or prospective candidate; or

3. the maintenance of any person who is a member of any legislative body constituted under the
constitution or for any local authority; or

4. the registration of electors or the selection of a candidate for any legislative body constituted under
[xxx] [the Constitution] or for any local authority; or

5. the holding of political meetings of any kind, or the distribution of political Literature or political
documents of any kind.
3. [(2A) In its application to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, references in Sub-section (2) to any legislative
body constituted under the Constitution shall be Construed as including references to the Legislature of that
State.]

4. No member shall be compelled to contribute to the fund constituted under sub-section (1); and a member
who does not contribute to the said fund shall not be excluded from any benefits of the trade union, or
placed in any respect either directly or indirectly under any disability or at any disadvantage as compared
with other members of the trade union (except in relation to the control or management of the said fund) by
reason of his not contributing to the said fund; and contribution to the said fund shall not be made a
condition for admission to the trade union.]
Section 17: Criminal conspiracy in trade disputes
No office bearer or member of a registered trade union shall be liable to punishment under sub-section (2) of section
120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of in respect of any agreement made between the members for the purpose
of Furthering any such object of the trade union as is specified in section 15, unless the agreement is an agreement to
commit an offence.

Section 18: Immunity from civil suit in certain cases

1. Any registered trade union or any (office-bearer) or member thereof in respect of act done in contemplation
or furtherance of a trade dispute to which a member of trade union is a party on the ground only that such
act induces some other person to break a contract of employment, or that it is in interference with the trade,
business employment of some other person or with the right of some other person to dispose of his capital
or of his labour as he wills.

2. A registered trade union shall not be liable in any suit or other legal proceeding in any civil court in respect
of any tortious act done in contemplation or further a trade dispute by an agent of the trade union if it is
proved that such person ate without the knowledge of, or contrary to express instructions given by, the
executive the trade union.

Section 19: Enforceability of agreements

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, An agreement between the
members of a registered trade union shall not be void or Voidable merely by reason of the fact that any of the
objects of the agreement are Restraint of trade:

PROVIDED that nothing in this section shall enable any civil court to entertain am legal proceeding instituted for
the express purpose of enforcing or recovering damage for the breach of any agreement concerning the conditions
on which any member da trade union shall or shall not sell their goods, transact business, work, employ or be
employed.

Section 20: Right to inspect books of trade unions

The account books of a registered trade union and the list of members thereof shall be open to inspection by an
'[office-bearer] or member of the trade union at such times as may be provided for in the rules of the trade union.

21: Rights of minors to membership of trade unions

Any person who has attained the age of fifteen years may be a member of a Registered trade union subject to any
rules of the trade union to the contrary, and may Subject as aforesaid, enjoy all the rights of a member and execute
all instruments and Give all acquittances necessary to be executed or given under the rules:

21A. Disqualifications of office-bearers of trade unions:

1. A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being member of the executive or any other
office-bearer of a registered trade union if:

1. He has not attained the age of eighteen years;

2. he has been convicted by court in India of any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced to
imprisonment, unless a period of five years has Elapsed since his release.
 2. ny member of the executive or other office-bearer of a registered trade union who, before the
commencement of the Indian Trade Union (Amendment) Act, 1964 (38 of 1964), has been convicted of
any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced to imprisonment, shall on the date of such
commencement cease to be such member or office-bearer unless a period of five years has elapsed since his
release before that date.

3. In its application to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, reference in sub-section (2) to the commencement of
the Indian Trade Union (Amendment) Act, 1964 (38 of 1964) shall be construed as reference to the
commencement of this Act in the said State.

Section 22: Proportion of office-bearers to be connected with the industry

1. Not less than one-half of the total number of the office-bearers of every registered Trade Union in an
unorganized sector shall be persons actually engaged or employed in an industry with which the Trade
Union is connected:

PROVIDED that the appropriate Government may, by special or general order, declare that the provisions
of this section shall not apply to any Trade Union or class of Trade Unions specified in the order.

Explanation: For the purposes of this section, "unorganized sector" means any sector which the appropriate
Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette. Specify.

2. Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (1), all office-bearers of a registered Trade Union, except not
more than one-third of the total number of the office-bearers Or five, whichever is less, shall be persons
actually engaged or employed in the Establishment or industry with which the Trade Union is connected.

Explanation: For the purposes of this sub-section, an employee who has retired or has been retrenched shall
not be construed as outsider for the purpose of holding an office in a Trade Union.

3. No member of the Council of Ministers or a person holding an office of profit (not being an engagement or
employment in an establishment or industry with which the Trade Union is connected), in the Union or a
State, shall be a member of the executive or other office-bearer of a registered Trade Union.]

Section 23: Change of name

Any registered trade union may, with the consent of not less than two-thirds of the Total number of members and
subject to the provisions of section 25, change its name.

Immunities- Amalgamation and Dissolution of unions--Reorganization of Trade Unions.

Section 24: Amalgamation of trade unions
Any two or more registered trade unions may become amalgamated together as one trade union with or without
dissolution or division of the funds of such trade unions or either or any of them, provided that the votes of at least
one-half of the members of each or every such trade union entitled to vote are recorded, and that at least sixty per
cent of the votes recorded are in favour of the proposal.

Section 25: Notice of change of name or amalgamation

1. Notice in writing of every charge of name and of every amalgamation signed, in the case of a change of
name, by the Secretary and by seven members of the trade union changing its name, and in the case of an
amalgamation, by the Secretary and by seven members of each and every trade union which is a party
thereto, shall be sent to the Registrar and where the head office of the amalgamated trade union is situated
in a different State, to the Registrar of such State.

2. If the proposed name is identical with that by which any other existing trade union has been registered or,
in the opinion of the Registrar, so nearly resembles such name as to be likely to deceive the public or the
 members of either trade union, the Registrar shall refuse to register the change of name.

3. Save as provided in sub-section (2), the Registrar shall, if he is satisfied that the provisions of this Act in
respect of change of name have been complied with, register the change of name in the register referred to
in section 8, and the change of name shall have effect from the date of such registration.

4. The Registrar of the State in which the head office of the amalgamated trade union is situated shall, if he is
satisfied that the provisions of this Act in respect amalgamation have been complied with and that the trade
union formed thereby is of entitled to registration under section 6, register the trade union in the manner
provided in section 5 and the amalgamation shall have effect from the date of such registration.

Section 26 : Effects of change of name and of amalgamation

1. The change in the name of a registered trade union shall not affect any rights or obligations of the trade
union or render defective any legal proceeding by or against the trade union, and any legal proceeding
which might have been continued or commenced by or against it by its former name may be continued or
commenced by or against it by its new name.

2. An amalgamation of two or more registered trade unions shall not prejudice Any right of any of such trade
unions or any right of a creditor of any of them.

Section 27: Dissolution

1. When a registered trade union is dissolved, notice of the dissolution signed by seven members and by the
Secretary of the trade union shall, within fourteen days of the dissolution be sent to the Registrar, and shall
be registered by him if he is satisfied that the dissolution has been affected in accordance with the rules of
the trade union. And the dissolution shall have effect from the date of such registration.

2. Where the dissolution of a registered trade union has been registered and the rules of the trade union do not
provide for the distribution of funds of the trade union on dissolution, the Registrar shall divide the funds
amongst the members in such manner as may be prescribed.

Section 28: returns

1. There shall be sent annually to the Registrar, on or before such date as may be prescribed, a general
statement, audited in the prescribed manner, of all receipts and expenditure of every registered trade union
during the year ending on the 31st day of [December] next preceding such prescribed date, and of the assets
and liabilities of the trade union existing on such 31st day of (December). The statement shall be prepared
In such form and shall comprise such particulars as may be prescribed.

2. Together with the general statement there shall be sent to the Registrar a statement showing changes of
loffice-bearers] made by the trade union during the year to which the general statement refers together also
with a copy of the rules of the trade union corrected up to the date of the despatch thereof to the Registrar.

3. (A copy of every alteration made in the rules of a registered trade union shall be sent to the Registrar within
fifteen days of the making of the alteration.

4. For the purpose of examining the documents referred to in sub-sections (1), 2) and (3), the Registrar, or any
officer authorized by him by general or special order, may at all reasonable times, inspect the certificate of
registration, account books, registers, and other documents, relating to a trade union, at its registered office
or may require their production at such place as he may specify in this behalf, but no such place shall be at
a distance of more than ten miles from the registered office of a trade union
Rights And Liabilities Of Trade Unions Are:
● A registered trade union must follow the provisions of the trade union act 1926. the following are the
restrictions in the registered trade union as well as a right to Establish a general fund.
● The office bearers must be given salaries.
● The funds can be spent on the costs incurred for the administration of the trade union.
● Compensating workers Due to loss in code out of trade dispute.
● Expenses incurred in the worker's welfare activities.
● Benefits are conferred to the workers in case of unemployment, disability, or death.
● The cost incurred and legal suit.
● Publishing Materials with the aim of discussing the questions affecting workman.
● For education of the workers or their dependant.
● Making provisions for workers of medical treatment
● Taking insurance policy for workers' welfare
● Section 16 Trade union cannot force members to subscribe to any political fund this might be a
disadvantage and to the other side subscription to this fund is not necessary for a member
Provides that a trade union may establish a separate fund from the contributions made separately for the
aforementioned objectives in order to advance the civic and political goals of its members. No union member may
be forced to make a donation to the fund.

A legally recognized labour union may establish a separate fund with the goal of advancing the civic and political
objectives of its members. A recognized trade union is not allowed to use its general finances for its members'
political campaigns. The trade union must establish a separate political fund for political causes. Contributions to
such a fund must be separately collected.

Here are a few of them:

● the reimbursement of all expenditures made, either directly or indirectly, by a candidate or potential
candidate for election to any governmental entity or local authority. The expenses encompass all
expenditures related to his campaign, whether they occur before, during, or after the election.
● maintenance of any person holding a position in a municipal or legislative body.
● voter enrollment or the selection of a candidate for any legislative body or local authority.
● the organization of political events of any kind or the dissemination of political literature or materials to
trade union members.
● A registered trade union is granted immunity in some criminal, civil, and contractual procedures under
sections 17, 18, and 19.
In cases of criminal conspiracy under section 120-B of the IPC done by an office bearer or a member, section 17
grants immunity from liability.
● However, this immunity is limited in that it only applies to contracts made by members for the
advancement of legitimate trade union objectives as defined in section 15 of the Act, making it a partial
immunity.

● Registered Trade Unions have certain rights to do in promotion of their labour disputes, including calling
for a strike and convincing members.

● West Indies Steel Company Ltd. v/s Azeez 1998

A trade union representative interrupted or blocked factory work for five hours in protest against the
transfer of a worker to another area. It was determined that a factory worker had to follow any instructions
given to him by his superiors. A union representative is not exempt from adhering to the regulations. A
trade union official or any other employee is not permitted by law to share managerial duties.

● Under section 20 A trade union must have all record books of accounts available and the list of
membership for inspection upon request of any member or his representative.
 ● As per section 21 even the miners have the right to be the member of trade union, but such minors cannot
hold office.
● As per section 21A, a trade union cannot appoint any person who has been convicted crime which is having
Imprisonment for six months or more than that within the last five years.

● As per section 22 at least half of the office pairs of a trade union must be engaged are employed in an
industry to which the trade union is connected. Rules of natural justice must be followed while a trade
union is to remove any office bearer.

● Any registered organization is permitted to change its name under Section 23 of the Act as long as at least
two-thirds of its members agree to the change and Section 25 of the Act's requirements are met.

● According to Section 24, two or more trade unions may merge to create a single trade union with or
without dividing the funds. Only after the votes of half of each trade union's members have been cast, and if
60% of the votes cast support the plan, can such an amalgamation take place.

● Section 25: Every name change, and amalgamation must include a written notification to the Registrar that
is properly signed by the Secretary and seven members of the Trade Union changing its name, as well as by
the Secretary and seven members of every Trade Union that is a party to the amalgamation.

The Registrar may decline to register the change of name if they believe that the proposed name is the same as any
other existing Trade Union's name or is so similar that it could mislead the general public or the members of either
Trade Union.

The amalgamation will take effect as of the date of such registration if the Registrar of the State in which the main
office of the combined Trade Union is located is satisfied that the requirements of this Act have been met.

According to Section 27 of the Act, a company may be dissolved as follows:

A notice of the dissolution of a registered trade union, which must be signed by seven members and the trade union
secretary, must be served to the registrar within 14 days of the dissolution. If the registrar is satisfied that the
dissolution has been carried out in accordance with the trade union's established rules, the dissolution may be
registered.

The registrar may distribute the funds in any authorized method when a union has been dissolved but its regulations
do not specify how the fund is to be distributed following the dissolution.

According to Section 28, each trade union must submit its yearly returns to the registrar on or before the date that
the registrar may specify. The refund contains:

Statement in general Audit report Every penny that the organization has brought in and spent Assets and liabilities
of the company as of December 31st According to Subsection 2 of this Section, the general statement must be sent
to the registrar along with a copy of the trade union's rules that has been updated as of the date of dispatch and a
statement listing all the changes the union has made during the year in question. Any time a recognized trade union
modifies its rules, those changes must be communicated to the registrar within at least 15 days (about 2 weeks) of
the modification.

Conclusion
For workers who are unable to advocate for themselves individually, the emergence of labour unions is a blessing.
Trade unions are established with the goal of engaging in collective action for their rights and advantages. The Trade
Union Act was passed to ensure the efficient operation of unions, and it contains rights and obligations that guard
against potential exploitation and safeguard interests. The Trade Unions Act of 1926 calls for the registration of
trade unions to create a legitimate labour organization that will allow for joint bargaining.

Suggestion
Trade union is playing an important role in todays' industries but in spite of the efforts made by several central trade
unions, women participation is very low. I think this need to be changed.

UNIT_2

Prevention and Settlement of Industrial Disputes in India-

Disputes are always a drawback for any industry. A dispute arises for several reasons, the most common being the
relation between the labourers and their wages. It is the conflict of interests between two parties that give rise to a
dispute. The parties involved in an industrial dispute are the employer and the employee. Traditionally speaking, the
employees have always been placed on the lower ladder of the society by the employer presenting a dominating self-
being in the position of authority. This inequality that has been existing in the industrial domain for a long time now
requires settlement on the part of both the employer and the employee having an equal opportunity to present their
wants.

An employee has the right to be provided with wages depending on the amount of work he delivers. It is the
responsibility on the part of the employer to provide his employees with a reasonable amount of wages along with
other conditions that are necessary for a person to earn his livelihood. The founder of the Australian system of
arbitration and conciliation, Mr Justice Higgins had correctly pointed out that the conflict between wage earners and
the profit creators will always be existing with us in our everyday life. It is therefore always necessary to settle the
disputes arising between two parties under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 in order to prevent the industry from
facing loss or sufferings.

All disputes arising in an industry cannot be resolved in the same manner and therefore comes the concept of the
mechanism of settling disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. Some of the mechanisms that are commonly
utilized are adjudication, conciliation, an inquiry by the court of law etc. These mechanisms help in settling the
disputes by investigating the matter and in to successfully carry out the process, available mechanisms are utilized.

It is to be remembered that industrial dispute is different from any other kind of dispute on grounds that it is
something more than just getting compensated for the loss suffered. Rather it is a constant fight against oppression
on the part of those who are employed for providing welfare among other sections of the society and not being
subjected to similar kind of welfare due to the authoritative rule on the part of the employer. It is correct that the
disputes settlement mechanisms can provide relief for a temporary period only, these settlement mechanisms, if used
effectively, can provide long term services also. Therefore what is necessary is the correct application of the
mechanisms available for settling disputes.

Industrial Dispute Act,1947

The Industrial Dispute Act,1947 is an Act that was formulated to guarantee fair and equal terms between the
employer and the employee. The act aims to settle the disputes that arise through negotiations. By doing so it
promotes industrial harmony and peace. The Industrial Dispute Act,1947 regulates the labour law in India as far as
the same relates to trade unions. Section2(k) of the Act,1947 lays down the meaning of an industrial dispute. The
parties that can be involved in an industrial dispute includes employers and workmen, two employees, employer and
workmen. The provision also lays down the grounds that need to be abided by in order to term a dispute as an
industrial dispute. These grounds are provided hereunder:

1. The mere difference of opinion will not constitute an industrial dispute instead of a factum of dispute
will.
2. The date of commencement of the dispute should be provided in writing by the union otherwise the
same reference will be declared invalid. It was in the case of Union of Journalists v. The Hindu where
the court observed that for a dispute to be claimed under industrial dispute, the same should be existing
or apprehending on the date that has been referred. Therefore what the court meant by these
 observations is that if the demand by the employees were not brought before the management under
which they work, and similar demands were raised during the time of the proceedings, the dispute will
still be considered as an industrial dispute and proceed further with settlement mechanisms. Similar
kind of view was made by the court in the case of Shambhu Nath Goel v Bank of Baroda also.
3. The dispute should be such that it affects the well-being of the majority of workmen and not a single
work-man.
4. The dispute that has arisen should be in relation with an individual workman or workmen in whom they
being a body is or are interested in.

To maintain a cordial relation between the employer and the employee, the Act lays down settlement mechanisms as
well that can be of some help. The authorities on whom the Act confers authority to carry out settlement and
investigation purposes for an industrial dispute are mentioned below:

1. Conciliation officer under Section 4 of the Act,1947

2. Works committee under Section 3 of the Act,1947
3. Labour court under Section 7 of the Act,1947
4. Boards of conciliation under Section 5 of the Act, 1947
5. Labour Tribunal under Section 7A of the Act, 1947
6. National tribunal under Section 7B of the Act, 1947

In the case of State of Bihar v. D.N.Ganguli, the Supreme Court decided that if a dispute which has already been
settled amicably by the parties have been brought before the tribunal with an assumption that the same will be
reconsidered by the tribunal then it would be very unreasonable to do so. As soon as the matter is settled before the
tribunal, the reward as compensation for the dispute will be provided by the tribunal itself. if the Further the Act
under Section 10 provides that if there arises any industrial dispute, that might be referred by the appropriate
government for adjudication to the Conciliation Board, Court of inquiry, labour court, national tribunal or industrial
tribunal. The different types of disputes that come under the ambit of an industrial dispute are:

1. Individual disputes, under which the disputes of termination, discharge, promotion of workmen,
security measures available to the workers, retirement benefits come in. Disputes coming under
individual disputes are either legal or rights disputes by nature. In the case of Central Provinces
Transport Services Ltd., v. R.G. Patwardhan the court opinionated that if a dispute arises between an
employer and a workman, then that cannot be termed as an industrial dispute unless the dispute is taken
up by the trade union or a collective group of workmen claiming that a legal dispute has taken place.
Therefore, in this case, the Supreme Court extended its support towards the trade union so that an
individual dispute can be treated as an industrial dispute and settlement can be done.
2. Collective disputes are those disputes which involve a group of workmen whose rights and interests
have been contravened with by the employer. This dispute is referred to as the most important
industrial dispute which if not resolved leads to a stoppage of work by the workers that can be
detrimental for the industry as a whole.
3. Disputes of rights and interest is another kind of industrial dispute. Disputes of rights are also referred
to as legal disputes that deal with the rights of the workmen that are already existing. When there is a
violation of the legal rights of the workers, disputes arise regarding the same.

The Act does not provide any provision for settling disputes by means of bilateral negotiations. If the parties fail to
negotiate mutually between themselves then the only way of resolving an industrial dispute is by adjudication on the
reference of the appropriate government. Therefore the role of voluntary arbitration is necessary on the basic
grounds for the parties involved in the dispute to resolve the same easily. If the same is not done then there are also
other ways of resolving the disputes. The best way of resolving disputes is by means of collective bargaining which
symbolises plurality of workmen working in the industry. If collective bargaining fails, then other mechanisms of
settlement involve conciliation, arbitration and voluntary arbitration. These methods are considered to be the
appropriate alternatives for collective bargaining.

Mechanism of Settlement disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act

Certain machinery is existing under the methods of settling industrial disputes which helps in regulating the
settlement and handling of the dispute in a just and fair manner for the parties involved in the dispute and thereby
ensure or guarantee a normalised situation under which the employer and the employee can exist and work in a
friendly manner which is required for the growth of the industry. The common mechanisms for settlement of
disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 have been explained in detail below.

Conciliation and Mediation

One of the most familiar ways to carry out the settlement of disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 is
conciliation which is also well-known by the name of mediation. It is not only restricted to India but this method of
dispute settlement is used all across the world. Conciliation is the procedure in which there is an involvement of a
third party who provides assistance to the parties in dispute to carry out negotiation between them. The two types of
machinery that are available for executing the conciliation functions are:

1. By the conciliation officers who work in the department of labour

2. The Conciliation Board is a body of several members consisting of a chairman, two to four members as
the representatives of the employers and the employees. These members are to be appointed by the
government on parties recommendation.

Section 4 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 lays down the function of a conciliation officer which is to create a
kindred atmosphere within the industry which will help the parties to settle the disputes between them. This is a
function with an administrative nature and not a judicial one.

A conciliation officer is required to hold proceedings, carry out investigations regarding the dispute in a fair manner
to help the parties arrive at a settlement. They are appointed to regulate settlement disputes for a specified area either
for a temporary time period or permanently. While Section 11 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 lays down the
powers vested upon a conciliation officer, Sections 12 and 13 are meant for dealing with the duties of the
conciliation officer.

After the government agrees that there is a failure in the report, to his satisfaction he can send the matter to the
Board of Conciliation or any other adjudicating body to look after the same. If such a step is not preferred, then the
government directly communicates the matter to the parties involved in the dispute. The usage of conciliation as a
settlement dispute mechanism is indeed effective as have been revealed by the statistical study. The parties while
being a part of the conciliation proceeding do not reveal the entire dispute matter with the thought that if the
proceedings are not effective enough to settle the dispute then the same can be tried by other legal remedies that are
available also. It is when the conciliation officers are not able to handle the disputed matter, the matter gets passed
on to the tribunals. This is also cited as a reason for the failure of conciliation.

Voluntary arbitration

Before dealing with the concept of voluntary arbitration as a whole, it is preferred to refer them separately for a
better understanding. Arbitration means a procedure which involves a third party in the form of a single arbitrator or
a board of arbitrators who are assigned with the duty to resolve the dispute between the parties. Voluntary
symbolises self willingness and consent. Therefore voluntary arbitration means that the parties who are involved in
the dispute willfully agree to the decision taken by the arbitrator or the board of arbitrators without any outside
compulsion.

Section 10A of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 provides the provision for voluntary arbitration which in a real-
world is completely carried out by adjudication. Arbitration and adjudication have a very thin line of difference
between them. While in the former the judge is decided by the parties involved in the dispute, whereas in the latter
the judge is appointed by the State.

The origin of voluntary arbitration in India dates back to the issue of plague bonus in the Ahmedabad Textile Mills
under the leadership of the father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi. To make voluntary arbitration compulsory, The
Trade Unions & Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill, 1988 was brought in laying down restrictions on legal
strikes by the employees. According to the bill, legal strikes can be carried out by the parties only after either of the
parties has rejected the offer of arbitration that had been provided to the parties to settle the dispute. Although
several efforts have been put to effect by the Indian government, voluntary arbitration still remains in shadows as
have been reflected by the statistics.

It was in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha, the apex court inform judicial
legislation vested on the arbitrator the powers of a labour tribunal for cases of discharge of workmen as a form of
punishment. This provided the arbitrator with appellate jurisdiction using which the arbitrator can oppose the
decision of an employer regarding his employees. These exceptional powers were conferred by the Supreme Court
of India on the arbitrator.

Adjudication

It is not that adjudication replaces conciliation totally but rather the matter is if conciliation fails to settle the dispute
between the parties in the industry, adjudication takes charge in carrying out the job which the conciliation
mechanism was assigned to do. It is just another legal remedy that can be adopted if the necessity arises. The
ultimate remedy for resolving an industrial dispute is by adjudication.

Adjudication can also be termed as the compulsory settlement of the industrial dispute in concern by labour courts,
industrial tribunals, and national tribunal as provided by the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. The terms adjudication and
arbitration have minute differences if placed in our country.

It is on the government to decide whether to refer to the party or not before proceeding with the adjudication
mechanism. If the parties are involved by the government then that type of adjudication will be referred to as
voluntary adjudication. Whereas if the government does not feel it to be necessary to involve the parties in the
adjudication mechanism then that kind of adjudication will be called compulsory adjudication.

Adjudication of the industrial dispute will take place by a three-tier system which will be inclusive of the following:

1. Labour court- The Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 under Section 7 provides for the constitution of a
labour court. The appropriate government in the form of notification in the official gazette can lead to
the constitution of a labour court for resolving the disputes in an industry. The labour court consists of
one person who is an independent judge or a judge of the High court or the District court. The judge
can also be a former judge of the labour court itself with an experience of about 5 years. The matters
handled by the labour court are provided in the second schedule of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947
which consists of:
1. The legality in the order passed by the employer under the orders that are standing
2. The implications of the standing orders
 3. Granting of relief that should be available to the workmen in the industry which has been
dismissed from them.
4. Withdrawal of any privilege that a workman is subjected to
5. All matters other than that coming under the purview of the industrial tribunal.
2. Industrial tribunal- The provision for the industrial tribunal is provided under Section 7A of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. One or more industrial tribunals can be set up by the government
according to his desire with the courts being provided with wider jurisdiction in comparison with the
labour court. It is not to be considered as a permanent body but body set up for temporary purpose for
hearing on an ad-hoc basis only. As the courts are having wider jurisdiction, the issues that will be
taken into consideration by the courts will also be large in number. Broadly the issues handled by the
industrial tribunal have been listed below:
1. Wages of the employee which included the mode of payment of wages also
2. Bonus and provident funds that are provided
3. Working hours of the employees
4. Rationalisation
5. Leaves that are granted to the employees inclusive of the wages received and the holidays
provided to them
6. Rules associated with the maintenance of discipline in the industry among the employees.
7. Any other matter which may be considered to be heard and discussed necessarily.
3. National tribunal- A national tribunal is formed by the Central Government by an official gazette for
adjudication of the industrial disputes that are considered to be of national importance. Two people
according to the choice of the government are appointed to the role of an assessor in the national
tribunal. If a dispute between two parties of an industry reaches the national tribunal, then both the
labour court and the industrial tribunal loses its jurisdiction over the matter.

Court of inquiry

The remedy in the form of a court of inquiry was first provided by The Trade Disputes Act, 1929 and was followed
by the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 also under Section 6. This mechanism of settling disputes has been out of use in
the country now. As the government of India could not figure out the benefit from this machinery in industrial
dispute cases, the machinery has been eliminated completely by The Trade Unions & Industrial Disputes
(Amendment) Bill, 1988 and is no more in use.

Landmark judgments

In the case of Workmen of Hindustan Lever Ltd v. Hindustan Lever Ltd, the court observed that for every industry
there is a necessity to promote harmonious construction of the wants of both the employer and the employee of an
industry for the industry and the labour force to grow and prosper in the long-term. In order to achieve this
objective, the court laid down that there is a need for compulsory adjudication for resolving industrial disputes by
means of a forum where the parties can resort for arbitration to avoid any kind of confrontation between them in the
industry. The courts have repeatedly made it clear that although a lot of powers have been vested over an
appropriate government, he cannot misuse such power in carrying out the procedure of settlement of disputes.

In the case of The Govt of India Vs. National Tobacco Company, the court held that the powers that have been
vested in the appropriate government are discretionary in nature and not mandatory. Therefore if in any particular
case the government carry out arbitrary actions which are contrary to the statute under which he is supposed to
function and has been refusing to refer the dispute at hand to the tribunals or the labour court, then such grounds will
be enough to file a writ petition against the government under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. From this
case, it can be observed that the Act provides with no scope to misuse the powers that have been vested to any
administrative body that can directly affect the dispute that is already existing and can further accelerate it as well
creating more problems.
Adding more to this idea of restricting the use of arbitrary power, the court in the case of Hochtief Gammon v. the
State of Orissa was of the opinion that the courts will have the authority to view that the action taken by the
executive is not unlawful and unfair in nature and in this process the courts’ vests the duty of ensuring that the
relevant matters of the dispute have been taken into concern in a large away while making a decision on the
appropriate government.

It was in the well-known case of Mathura Refinery Mazdoor Sangh v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India
gave importance to the tribunals to deal with the industrial dispute and also directed the government to take
consultancy from the tribunals itself. Thus in this way, the court separated the mechanism of settlement dispute
under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 as a separate entity altogether.

In another case named United Bleachers (P) Ltd. v. LC, the High Court at Madras was of the view that if any kind of
delay happens on the part of the appropriate government to make a reference, then that will not be a valid ground to
decline the relief that is to be granted to the labourers who are in the dispute and have relatively suffered from the
same already. If there is a denial of the relief on this very ground then the same will be referred to as an unfair
labour practice and thereby will be unlawful. Thus the judgments that are discussed above reflects that whatever be
the dispute, the courts always intend to settle it providing justice to both the parties involved in the dispute.

Conclusion

Despite a lot of loopholes in the system, the interference of the Supreme Court and the High Courts have indeed
been helpful in regulating the statute governing the industrial dispute. Settlement disputes under the Industrial
Dispute Act, 1947 is indeed a way in which the chaos associated with industry can be removed. As India slowly
develops with the introduction of several industries, it has become necessary to ensure the proper functioning of the
industries in order to help develop the country economically. For the same the Industries Dispute Act, 1947 plays an
essential role by not only providing the provisions as to how to regulate the working of an industry but also laying
down settlement mechanisms that can help resolve disputes between the employee and employer. Coordination of
both can help industry run smoothly and effectively. Some of the ways in which settlement machinery can function
effectively are listed hereunder:

1. The mechanism of conciliation should be regulated by the officers who are experienced in the field and
are acknowledged with the issues that are majorly faced by industrial workers. This mechanism should
also not be a subject-matter for the political and administrative influences in order to prevent the
mechanism from being used in a wrong way which can affect the industrial dispute that is already at
hand.
2. Industrial Relations Commissions should be set up at both Central and provincial levels according to
the guidelines of the National Commission of Labours in order to strengthen the framework of the
available adjudicatory machinery.
3. The arbitration procedure should be just and fair like all other court proceedings so that the decision
taken as a conclusion to the industrial dispute that has arisen should be able to satisfy both the parties
involved in the dispute.
4. Government interference from any kind of industrial dispute should be avoided unless urgently
required in order to deal with the matter effectively and independently without much influence as has
been mentioned earlier as well. The arbitrators are supposed to take independent decisions so that the
employers and the employees are treated equally and fairly.

The role of State in Industrial Relations under new Industrial Relations Code 2020-
The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 is one of the four major Labour Codes that is part of the largest reform scheme
of the Central Government in decades. It includes three main core laws that relate to the settlement of labour
disputes and collective bargaining agreements, namely:

1. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

2. The Trade Unions Act, 1926
3. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946

The aforementioned laws were passed for different purposes and objectives; however, their broad area of concern is
similar. The Industrial Dispute Act of 1947 was intended to provide workers with a mechanism that would provide
relief against layoffs, downsizing and wrongful termination that is against the letter of the law. It also sought to
foster healthy labour relations by minimizing the scope for illegal strikes and lockouts and penalizing unfair labour
practices. Therefore, it provided a dispute resolution mechanism, as well as restrictions on layoffs, downsizing and
lockouts to ensure that collective bargaining can take place in a pleasant environment.

The Trade Unions Act of 1926 aimed to provide workers with better working conditions, better wages, protection
against abusive employment, a fair share of company profits, and to this end, allowed workers to realize their right
to form an association, as well as collective negotiation. It facilitated the organization of workers unions and allowed
greater participation of the workforce in the management of an establishment. The purpose of the Industrial
Employment (standing order) Act,1946, is to have it at the plant level and other commercial establishments, to
regulate industrial relations. This regulates the conditions of employment, grievances, misconduct etc. of the
workers employed in the Industry.

Salient features of Industrial Relations Code, 2020

The key changes brought in by the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 can be summed up as follows:-

1. The definition of worker has been broadened and now includes working journalists as defined in
Section 2(f) of the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act of 1955 and employees of Sales promotion as defined in Section 2(d) of
the Sales Promotion Employees (Terms of Service) Act 1976. Persons employed in a supervisory
capacity earning less than Rs. 18,000 per month (or any amount notified by the Central Government) is
included in the definition of “worker”.
2. Fixed-term employment has a legal basis, unlike the current scheme in which video notifications from
various state governments were introduced. It allows employers greater flexibility to hire in line with
supply and demand. Fixed-term employees are eligible to receive tips on a pro-rata basis if they serve
for one year under their respective employment contracts. They are given equality with permanent
employees concerning working conditions, wages, allowances, and other benefits.
3. The applicability threshold of the Labour Disputes (Regulation) Act 1947 under the Labour Relations
Bill 2019 had been established in establishments employing 100 or more employees. However, the
2020 Industrial Relations Code has raised this threshold to 300 and has given the “appropriate
government” the power to exempt any industrial establishment or class thereof from all or some of the
provisions of the Code.
4. Regarding trade union law, the Code establishes that when there is more than one union in an
establishment, the status of the only bargaining union will be granted to the one with 51% of the
employees as members. This threshold is a marked decrease from the 75% threshold that was
established in the 2019 bill.
 5. There is also a provision for the establishment of the constitution of a bargaining council where there is
not a single union that meets the 51% threshold as mentioned above. In such cases, the council is made
up of representatives of the various unions as long as they have at least 20% of employees as members.
6. Concerning layoffs and reductions in personnel, Section 65 applies to industrial establishments that are
not included in Chapter X of the Code, which is essentially Chapter VB of the Industrial Dispute Act of
1947. It applies to industrial establishments in which more than fifty workers are working on average
per working day during the previous calendar year.
7. Section 77 of Chapter X applies to industrial establishments in which no less than 300 workers or a
greater number of workers than may be specified by the corresponding government, were employed on
average per working day in the previous 12 months. Therefore, the establishments included in this
provision must obtain prior permission from the Government for layoffs, staff reductions and closure.
8. The Code forbids strikes and immediate lockouts in all companies and therefore no company can strike
contrary to the contract 60 days before the strike or the expiry of a date specified in the strike
notification. Strikes are also prohibited while mediation is in progress and within 7 days of the
conclusion of such a process. Strikes are also prohibited while proceedings are pending before a labour
court or 60 days after they are concluded. The Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 contained similar
provisions, but only applied to public utilities.

Trade Union: negotiating union & negotiating council

The Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides a new concept for negotiating trade unions or negotiating councils in
an industrial company. According to the stated provision:

1. In the case of a single union in an industrial company, the employer recognizes that union as the sole
bargaining union of the workers.
2. If there are several unions, the union is recognized by the employer as a bargaining union with 51% of
the employees in the industrial company’s model directory.
3. In the case of several trade unions, none of which fulfil the above-mentioned 51% membership criteria,
the employer forms a negotiating council made up of representatives of these registered trade unions,
who are supported by at least 20% of the total workforce of the industrial company (1 representative for
every 20 %).
4. Industrial Relations Code 2020 also provides that if the central / state government believes that there is
a need for a union or confederation to be recognized as a central / state union, that government may
recognize the trade unions alike.

Strikes and lockouts

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 defines “strike” as including the concerted casual vacation on a given
day of fifty percent or more of the workers in an industry.
2. No employee can strike without reporting a strike to the employer 14 days in advance. This notification
is valid for a maximum of 60 days.
3. Likewise, no employer can lockout one of its employees without giving 14 days notice of the lockout.
This notification is valid for a maximum of 60 days.
4. In addition, Industrial Relations Code 2020 prohibits strikes and lockouts:

(i) during and up to seven days after arbitration; and

(ii) during and up to sixty days after or before trial in a court or arbitrator
(iii) during any period in which a settlement or arbitration award is in effect.

5. Employers are required to report to the relevant government and arbitration officer within five days of
receiving/announcing a strike/lockout.

Standing orders

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 states that the provisions regarding standing orders will apply to the
establishments that have had three hundred or more employees on any day in the preceding twelve
months or a year.
2. An employer will be required to prepare a draft of standing orders, based on the Central Government
model standing order, within 6 months from the code start date, in consultation with recognized
bargaining unions or members of the negotiating council concerning the same and it must be certified
by the certifying officer.

Re-skilling funds

Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides for the creation of a “reskilling fund” for employees laid off from the
industrial establishment by the employer. The fund will be made up of the following amounts:

1. Employer contribution, equivalent to 15 days of salary as the last retirement of the worker immediately
before being fired.
2. Contributions from other sources as prescribed.

The fund must be used to pay the last 15 days of salary extracted by the worker, to his account, within 45 days after
the worker’s dismissal.

Layoff and retrenchment

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 defines lay-off as the inability of an employer, due to shortage of coal,
or power, material or breakdown of machinery, accumulation of material or natural calamity from
giving employment to a worker whose name is on the muster roll and has not been retrenched.
2. Retrenchment refers to the termination of service of a workman for any reason other than disciplinary
action. It does not include retirement, non-renewal of contract, or completion of tenure of fixed-term
employment or termination on the ground of continued ill-health.
3. The provisions on lay-off and retrenchment under Industrial Relations Code 2020 do not apply to
industrial establishments with less than 50 workers on an average per working day or seasonal
industrial establishments.
4. Employers are required to give to every worker who has completed at least one year of continuous
service:

(i) 50% of basic wages and dearness allowance if he is laid off, and

(ii) one month’s notice (or equivalent wages) and 15 days’ wages for every year of continuous service for such a
period to a worker who has been retrenched.
 5. Further, factories, mines and plantations, which have three hundred or more workers must take prior
permission of the appropriate Government before lay-off, retrenchment and closure.

Power of government to reject or modify the tribunal award

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 provides that the government may, in certain circumstances, postpone
enforcement of arbitral awards made by the tribunals for public reasons that threaten the national
economy or social justice.
2. The Industrial Dispute Act,1947 contained similar provisions. In 2011, the Madras High Court
(confirming a 1997 ruling by the Andhra Pradesh High Court) overturned these provisions on
constitutional grounds, ruling that the power of the executive branch to refuse or change the execution
of an arbitral award ruled it to be the executive branch makes it possible to appeal the decision of the
tribunal and thus violates the separation of powers between the executive and judiciary, which is part of
the basic structure of the constitution.

Grievance Redressal Mechanism

1. Industrial Relations Code 2020 states that any industrial establishment employing more than 20
employees must have one or more complaint redressal committees for the resolution of disputes arising
from individual complaints.
2. The committee should be made up of an equal number of members representing employers and
workers, and the chair should be elected, alternately, from among employees and workers, on a rotating
basis each year.
3. The number of grievance redress committees cannot exceed 10 and there must be adequate
representation of female workers on the committee and must not be less than the proportion of women
employed in the industrial establishment.

Conclusion

An industry can grow only when there is peace and harmony in the industrial environment and it is only possible
when there is a union in an industry. Having a union in the workplace or any industry is very important. An industry
needs to keep its work going so that the needs of the nation can be met and the economy can thrive. If there is no
coordination between the employees and the employers, or if there is some conflict between them, this can also
affect the economy of the nation. Therefore, it is important to have a union in all workplaces. The union helps to
have effective communication between workers and management. They provide special support to workers in a
small platform to hold their opinion and raise the issue they face in the workplace. It also ensures that the workers,
both men and women who work there, are protected and do not face any kind of malicious or unpleasant activity.

Concluding this, my opinion is that having a Labour Relations Code is important to protect the interest of the worker
so that they do not feel neglected and do not have to worry about the workload or the disqualification of their place
with another person. Labour law was always important legislation that was not recognized for a long time, although
there are laws, they are not enough to protect the interests of workers and employers. Therefore, having a new 2020
Labour Relations Code has helped workers secure their rights and maintain peace in the workplace.

Definition of industry- Industrial Dispute- Individual Dispute

Meaning of Industrial Dispute

In accordance with Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, an “industrial dispute” arises when there is a
disagreement or discord between employers and employers, between employers and workers or between workmen
and workmen, which pertains to an individual’s employment status, the absence of employment, terms of
employment or the conditions under which the employee works.
The parties involved in an industrial dispute may include:
● Employers and employees.
● Employers and other employers.
● Workers and other workers.
It’s essential to note that for an issue to qualify as an industrial dispute, it must go beyond a mere difference of
opinion; there must be a substantive point of contention. Additionally, this dispute needs to be officially endorsed in
writing by a union at the outset of the conflict. Subsequent endorsements will not retroactively validate the
reference.
Consequently, the date on which the dispute was initially raised holds significant importance. This date has
implications not only for an individual worker but also for multiple workers as a collective class working within an
industrial establishment. The dispute may pertain to any specific worker or worker or extend to any other individual
in whom they have a shared interest as a group.
A noteworthy legal precedent, as established in the case of Jadhav J. H. v. M/s. Forbes Gokak Ltd (2005), is that
even if a dispute involves a single worker, it can be classified as an industrial dispute as long as the dispute receives
support from a union or a group of workers, regardless of whether the supporting union represents the majority of
the union membership.

Meaning of Individual Dispute

An individual dispute is one that originates from a single employee’s grievance. To be classified as an industrial
dispute, it must be raised by a registered trade union. Individual disputes can transform into collective industrial
disputes when they incorporate the interests of the broader community or when they receive support from workers
themselves or their union or federation acting on their behalf.
Section 9C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 addresses the establishment of grievance redressal bodies and the
transfer of certain individual disputes to such entities. According to this section, if a company employs 50 or more
workers, they are required to establish a body known as a Grievance Settlement Authority. This authority is tasked
with resolving disputes between the company and individual workers and operates under specific government-
prescribed regulations. The primary objective is to resolve any conflicts or disagreements between individual
workers and the company in an equitable and impartial manner.

Causes of Industrial Dispute

Industrial disputes typically arise from the rights of workers to engage in collective bargaining. To qualify as an
industrial dispute, it’s essential for workers or employees to make a demand related to their employment or non-
employment, which is subsequently refused by the entity to whom the demand is addressed, leading to a
disagreement between the parties involved.
In the case of Sindhu Resettlement Corporation Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal (1967), the Supreme Court clarified
that when workmen do not have any existing conflict with the management, any requests they make to the
government are considered mere demands. A request made to the government without a prior dispute with
management cannot be deemed a labour dispute.
The term “industrial dispute” has been comprehensively defined in the case of Workmen employed by Hindustan
Lever Ltd v. Workmen of Hindustan Lever Ltd. (1984). According to this labour law case, any disagreement or
conflict that may arise between an employer and its workers falls under this definition. Consequently, the nature of
the conflict does not preclude it from being classified as an industrial dispute.
The decision in Shambu Nath Goyal v. Bank of Baroda (1983) established that even if a demand was not initially
presented to the management and rejected by them but was introduced during referral or conciliation processes, it
may still be referred to as an “industrial dispute.”
The causes of industrial disputes can encompass economic factors, such as dissatisfaction with compensation,
including wages, promotions, bonuses, allowances and other benefits, as well as working conditions, such as
working hours, leave, unpaid holidays, unfair layoffs, retrenchments and dismissal disputes.
Non-economic issues can also give rise to disputes, including worker victimisation, mistreatment by colleagues,
sympathy strikes, political considerations, indiscipline and more. Non-economic causes of industrial disputes can be
categorised as psychological causes, involving personality clashes, worker demands for self-respect and recognition
and administrative issues. Institutional causes, such as the non-recognition and non-registration of trade unions,
problems with collective bargaining, unfair trade practices and the denial of workers’ legal and other rights, also
contribute to such disputes.

When an Individual Dispute Becomes an Industrial Dispute

To declare an individual conflict as an industrial dispute, several key elements must be satisfied:

Support from Labour Body or Trade Union

It is crucial that a group of labourers, trade unions or a substantial number of workers align themselves with the
individual workman who is raising the issue. As demonstrated in the case of Newspaper Ltd., Allahabad v. UP
State Industrial Tribunal (1960), when a group of workers, either through their union or other means, back an
individual worker’s complaint, it can be classified as an industrial dispute. However, this support or sponsorship
must come from employees of the same employer against whom the complaint is made.

Representative Character
The dispute must be taken up or sponsored by workers as a collective body of a trade union or by a significant
proportion of them before the reference date.
For instance, in the case of Workmen of Indian Express Newspapers Ltd. v. Management Indian Express
Newspapers (1968), where there was no union among Indian Express journalists, the issue was taken up by the
Delhi Union of Journalists, an external union. The court recognised the representative character of this union
because it represented a substantial portion of Indian Express’s working journalists.

Conditions of Section 2A
Alternatively, for an individual dispute to be considered an industrial dispute, it must meet the conditions stipulated
in Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
According to Section 2A, if an employer terminates the services of an employee due to a dispute or differences
between the worker and their employer, even if no other worker or union of workers is involved, the resulting
dispute is classified as an industrial dispute.

Resolution Process
After three months from the date of filing an application with the conciliation officer, any worker can directly apply
to the labour court or industrial tribunal for the resolution of such a dispute. The government has the authority to
appoint conciliation officers, who play a role in mediating and facilitating settlements in industrial disputes.
These officers may be appointed for specific regions, industries or periods to expedite the resolution process.
However, the application for dispute resolution must be submitted within three years after the date of dismissal,
discharge, retrenchment or termination of employment.
Once an application reaches the court, it proceeds as if it had been referred to it under Section 10 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, ensuring that the dispute is addressed through the appropriate legal channels.

Relevant Cases for Industrial Dispute and Individual Dispute

In the case of Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd. v. First Labour Court, West Bengal and Others (1958), it was
established that a dispute can be classified as an industrial dispute even if it is supported by an unregistered union.
However, it is essential that the trade union be affiliated with the employer or the specific industry in question. This
ruling highlights the importance of the union’s connection to the relevant employer or industry in determining
whether a dispute qualifies as an industrial dispute.
Regarding the issue of delay in filing industrial disputes, the case of Guest, Keen, Williams Pvt. Ltd., Calcutta v.
P.J. Sterling (1959) provided valuable guidance. The Supreme Court stated that if a dispute arises after a significant
delay that is not reasonably explained, the tribunal handling the case would take this fact into account when
assessing the merits of the dispute. In other words, a delay in filing an industrial dispute may not automatically
disqualify it from being heard, but the circumstances surrounding the delay can influence how the dispute is
evaluated by the tribunal.

Difference Between Industrial Dispute and Individual Dispute

The difference between industrial dispute and individual dispute is critical in labour law. An industrial dispute
typically involves conflicts that affect large groups of workers and employers aligned on opposing sides.
Conversely, an individual dispute is one raised by a single worker. It’s important to note that the involvement of a
registered trade union is not mandatory to classify a dispute as an industrial dispute.
In the context of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the definition of a dispute encompasses cases raised either for a
workman or any person for whom the workmen have a substantial interest in matters related to employment or non-
employment, terms of employment or conditions of labour.
The term “any person” in this context includes both workmen and any other individuals, provided they are
connected with the workmen concerning employment or non-employment, terms of employment or conditions of
labour. Essentially, “any person” must be an employee of the industry in which the workmen are also employed, as
established in the case of Narendra Kumar Sen v. All India Bank Dispute (AIR 1953 Bom 325).
Similarly, in the case of Workmen of Dirakuchi Tea Estate v. Management of Dirakuchi Tea Estate (1958 AIR
353), the expression “any person” was interpreted to mean a person whose employment or non-employment, terms
of employment or conditions of labour were of substantial interest to the workmen as a class with whom they shared
a community of interest under the framework of the Industrial Disputes Act.
The court emphasised that only the aggrieved party can initiate a dispute, but in the case of an industrial dispute, it is
treated as collective because it is recognised that an industrial dispute not supported by others of the same class to
which the aggrieved party belongs is not considered an industrial dispute.
In summary, the term “any person” in the definition of a dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,
encompasses individuals for whom workmen have a significant interest in employment-related matters, even if those
individuals do not fall within the definition of “workmen” as defined by the Act. This interpretation allows for a
broader scope in addressing disputes that impact the employment and working conditions of a collective group of
workers.

Summary: Difference Industrial Dispute and Individual Dispute

Aspect Industrial Dispute Individual Dispute

Nature of Dispute Involves conflicts affecting groups of Arises from grievances raised by a
workers and employers, typically in an single worker concerning their
industry or establishment. employment or related matters.

Number of Parties Involves multiple parties on opposing Involves only the aggrieved individual
Involved sides, often including trade unions worker and their employer.
representing workers.

Support and Can be supported by registered trade Typically initiated and pursued by the
Sponsorship unions or a significant number of individual worker raising the issue.
workers, transforming it into a
collective dispute.
 Registration of Not mandatory for a dispute to be The involvement of a registered trade
Union classified as an industrial dispute. union is not required for an individual
dispute.

Scope of Impact The outcome affects a broader group of Limited in scope, with consequences
workers and often has implications for primarily for the individual worker
industry-wide or establishment-wide involved.
practices.

Resolution Process Typically subject to the procedures Resolved through established

outlined in the Industrial Disputes Act, workplace grievance procedures,
including conciliation, arbitration and negotiation or legal avenues available
legal recourse. to the individual worker.

Examples Strikes, lockouts, collective bargaining Issues related to an individual worker’s

disputes, disputes related to industry- termination, wages, promotions or
wide labour practices. working conditions.

Legal Framework Governed by the Industrial Disputes Act Governed by labour laws, employment
or relevant labour laws in the contracts and workplace policies.
jurisdiction.

Collective vs. Generally addressed collectively on Primarily involves the aggrieved

Individual behalf of a group of workers with individual worker pursuing their
Approach common interests. specific grievance.

Conclusion
An industrial dispute involves conflicts between groups of workers and employers, while an individual dispute
pertains to grievances raised by a single worker against their employer.

Workman
Workman is the base of the industry. Industry can nither be established or maintained without the workman. It is the
workman who provides labour to the industry. It is the reason that workman has been given special place in the
industrial dispute act. The definition of workman is important because the act aims at investigation and settlement of
industrial dispute which implies a difference between an employer and workmen. So it is very necessary to decide
who is a workman or employees.

Definition
Section 2(S) of the industrial dispute act 1947, workman means any person employed in any industry to do any
manual , unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical, supervisory work for heir or reward whether the term of
the employment be expressed or implied and for the purpose of any proceeding under this act in relation to an
industrial dispute including any such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection with or
as consequences of that dispute or whose dismissal, discharge or retrenchment has led to the dispute.

Above definition of workman shows following symptoms:

1. A workman must be employed in an industry
2. Employment for heir or reward
3. There shall be some consideration
4. Nature of work performed by such person may be manual, skilled, unskilled, technical, operational, clerical
or supervisory.
5. Industry in which workman is employed shall be an industry as definition in section 2(J) of IDA 1947
6. The section 2(a) of the IDA 1947 clearly mention that the terms of the employment may be expressed/
implied
7. In relation to an industrial dispute a workman includes any such person who has been dismissed,
discharged or retrenchment or as consequences of the dispute has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched.
Person not includes in workman
1. Who is subject to Air Forces Act, Army Act, and Navy Act.
2. Person employed in police services or jail services.
3. Person employed in managerial or administrative capacity.
4. Person employed in a supervisory capacity draws wages exceeding 1600 rupees per mensem.
The word workmen has been defined by several judicial decisions

Case law:
Bihar State Road transport cooperation v/s state of Bihar AIR 1970 SC

It was held that such person has been considered as workman who:
1. Was employed as head clerk in the office of regional manager.
2. His term of employment were being regulated by the orders of state roadways department.
3. His nature of work was not managerial or administrative.

Case law:
H.C chuahan v/s life insurance corporation of India 1982

It was held that such development officers were held to be workman who:
1. Perform daily, manual, mechanical or clerical work
2. Do not perform managerial or administrative work
3. Cannot appoint or dismiss any other
4. Cannot also distribute the work
5. Obtained a salary of approx. Rs 500 or more.

Special Provisions relating to lay-off, retrenchment and closure under Industrial Disputes Act
Chapter V-B was added in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 through amendment under Article 32 of the
Constitution. This chapter deals with the special provisions relating to lay-off, retrenchment and closure in certain
establishments. Chapter V-B includes Section 25-K to Section 25-S of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Definitions
of lay-off, retrenchment and closure under Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 are as under:

Definition of Lay off (Section 2(kkk))-

“Lay-off” (with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions) means the failure, refusal or inability of an
employer on account of shortage of coal, power or raw materials or the accumulation of stocks or the breakdown of
machinery [or natural calamity or for any other connected reason] to give employment to a workman whose name is
borne on the muster rolls of his industrial establishment and who has not been retrenched.

Definition of Retrenchment (Section 2(oo))-

“Retrenchment” means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever,
otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action, but does not include-
(a) Voluntary retirement of the workman; or
(b) Retirement of the workman on reaching the age of superannuation if the contract of employment between the
employer and the workman concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf; or [(bb) termination of the service of the
workman as a result of the on-renewal of the contract of employment between the employer and the workman
concerned on its expiry or of such contract being terminated under a stipulation in that behalf contained therein; or]
(c) Termination of the service of a workman on the ground of continued ill-health;]

Definition of Closure (Section 2(cc))-

“Closure” means the permanent closing down of a place of employment or part thereof;

Application of Chapter V-B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947-

Under Section 25-K of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the application of Chapter V-B dealing with special provisions
relating to lay-off, retrenchment and closure is mentioned. The provision mentions the area where the Chapter V-B
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 applies.

Section 25-K- (1) The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to an industrial establishment (not being an
establishment of a seasonal character or in which work is performed only intermittently) in which not less than
2[one hundred] workmen were employed on an average per working day for the preceding twelve months. (2) If a
question arises whether an industrial establishment is of a seasonal character or whether work is performed therein
only intermittently, the decision of the appropriate Government thereon shall be final.

Special Provision relating to Lay-Off

Section 25-M Prohibition of lay-off
(1) No workman (other than a badli workman or a casual workman) whose name is borne on the muster rolls of an
industrial establishment to which this Chapter applies shall be laid-off by his employer except [with the prior
permission of the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by that Government by notification
in the Official Gazette (hereafter in this section referred to as the specified authority), obtained on an application
made in this behalf, unless such lay-off is due to shortage of power or to natural calamity, and in the case of a mine,
such lay-off is due also to fire, flood, excess of inflammable gas or explosion],

(2) An application for permission under sub-section (1) shall be made by the employer in the prescribed manner
stating clearly the reasons for the intended lay-off and a copy of such application shall also be served simultaneously
on the workmen concerned in the prescribed manner.

(3) Where the workmen (other than badli workmen or casual workmen) of an industrial establishment, being a mine,
have been laid-off under subsection (1) for reasons of fire, flood or excess of inflammable gas or explosion, the
employer, in relation to such establishment, shall, within a period of thirty days from the date of commencement of
such lay-off, apply, in the prescribed manner, to the appropriate Government or the specified authority for
permission to continue the lay-off.

(4) Where an application for permission under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been made, the appropriate
Government or the specified authority, after making such enquiry as it thinks fit and after giving a reasonable
opportunity of being heard to the employer, the workmen concerned and the persons interested in such lay-off, may,
having regard to the genuineness and adequacy of the reasons for such lay-off, the interests of the workmen and all
other relevant factors, by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, grant or refuse to grant such permission
and a copy of such order shall be communicated to the employer and the workmen.

(5) Where an application for permission under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been made and the appropriate
Government or the specified authority does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to
the employer within a period of sixty days from the date on which such application is made, the permission applied
for shall be deemed to have been granted on the expiration of the said period of sixty days.

(6) An order of the appropriate Government or the specified authority granting or refusing to grant permission shall,
subject to the provisions of sub-section (7), be final and binding on all the parties concerned and shall remain in
force for one year from the date of such order.

(7) The appropriate Government or the specified authority may, either on its own motion or on the application made
by the employer or any workman, review its order granting or refusing to grant permission under sub-section (4) or
refer the matter or, as the case may be, cause it to be referred, to a Tribunal for adjudication: Provided that where a
reference has been made to a Tribunal under this sub-section, it shall pass an award within a period of thirty days
from the date of such reference.

(8) Where no application for permission under sub-section (1) is made, or where no application for permission under
sub-section (3) is made within the period specified therein, or where the permission for any lay-off has been refused,
such lay-off shall be deemed to be illegal from the date on which the workmen had been laid-off and the workmen
shall be entitled to all the benefits under any law for the time being in force as if they had not been laid-off.

(9) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, the appropriate Government
may, if it is satisfied that owing to such exceptional circumstances as accident in the establishment or death of the
employer or the like, it is necessary so to do, by order, direct that the provisions of sub-section (1), or, as the case
may be, sub-section (3) shall not apply in relation to such establishment for such period as may be specified in the
order.

(10) The provisions of section 25C (other than the second proviso thereto) shall apply to cases of lay-off referred to
in this section.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, a workman shall not be deemed to be laid-off by an employer if such
employer offers any alternative employment (which in the opinion of the employer does not call for any special skill
or previous experience and can be done by the workman) in the same establishment from which he has been laid-off
or in any other establishment belonging to the same employer, situate in the same town or village, or situate within
such distance from the establishment to which he belongs that the transfer will not involve undue hardship to the
workman having regard to the facts and circumstances of his case, provided that the wages which would normally
have been paid to the workman are offered for the alternative appointment also.

Reasonable restrictions-
In order to prevent hardship to the employees and to maintain higher tempo of production and productivity, section
25M of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 puts some reasonable restrictions on the employer’s right to lay-off,
retrenchment and closure. Section 25-M makes it clear that no workmen whose name is borne on the muster rolls of
his employer shall be laid off without previous permission of such authority as may be specified by the appropriate
government unless such lay off is due to shortage of power or natural calamity and in case of a mine it is due to fire,
flood, etc.

Constitutional Validity of Section 25-M

In Papnasam Labour Union V. Madhura Coats Ltd. And another the constitutionality of Section 25-M of Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 was challenged on the ground that the section as amended by the Amendment Act of 1976
imposed unreasonable restrictions in so far as it required prior permission to be obtained to effect lay-off and as such
it was ultra vires and void. It was held that the object of Section 25-M is to prevent avoidable hardship to the
employees resulting from lay-off and maintain higher production and productivity by preserving industrial peace
and harmony. It was further pointed out that the legislature has taken care in exempting the need for prior
permission to lay-off in Section 25-M if such lay-off is necessitated on account of power of failure or natural
calamities because such reasons being grave, sudden and explicit, no further scrutiny is called for. Therefore, in the
greater public interest for maintaining industrial peace and harmony and to prevent unemployment without just
cause, the restriction imposed under sub-section (2) of Section 25-M cannot be held arbitrary, unreasonable or far in
excess of the need for which such restriction has been sought to be imposed. Criminal cases need not be pursued, not
only within the ambit of Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code but in special facts of the case will also secure the
ends of justice.

Special Provision Relating To Retrenchment

Section 25-N Condition precedent to retrenchment of workmen-
(1) No workman employed in any industrial establishment to which this Chapter applies, who has been in
continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until,— (a) the
workman has been given three months’ notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of
notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice; and (b)
the prior permission of the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by that Government by
notification in the Official Gazette (hereafter in this section referred to as the specified authority) has been obtained
on an application made in this behalf.

(2) An application for permission under sub-section (1) shall be made by the employer in the prescribed manner
stating clearly the reasons for the intended retrenchment and a copy of such application shall also be served
simultaneously on the workmen concerned in the prescribed manner.

(3) Where an application for permission under sub-section (1) has been made, the appropriate Government or the
specified authority, after making such enquiry as it thinks fit and after giving a reasonable opportunity of being
heard to the employer, the workmen concerned and the person interested in such retrenchment, may, having regard
to the genuineness and adequacy of the reasons stated by the employer, the interests of the workmen and all other
relevant factors, by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, grant or refuse to grant such permission and a
copy of such order shall be communicated to the employer and the workmen,

4) Where an application for permission has been made under sub-section (1) and the appropriate Government or the
specified authority does not communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a
period of sixty days from the date on which such application is made, the permission applied for shall be deemed to
have been granted on the expiration of the said period of sixty days.

(5) An order of the appropriate Government or the specified authority granting or refusing to grant permission shall,
subject to the provisions of sub-section (6) be final and binding on all the parties concerned and shall remain in force
for one year from the date of such order.

(6) The appropriate Government or the specified authority may, either on its own motion or on the application made
by the employer or any workman, review its order granting or refusing to grant permission under sub-section (3) or
refer the matter or, as the case may be, cause it to be referred, to a Tribunal for adjudication: Provided that where a
reference has been made to a Tribunal under this sub-section, it shall pass an award within a period of thirty days
from the date of such reference.

(7) Where no application for permission under sub-section (1) is made, or where the permission for any
retrenchment has been refused, such retrenchment shall be deemed to be illegal from the date on which the notice of
retrenchment was given to the workman and the workman shall be entitled to all the benefits under any law for the
time being in force as if no notice had been given to him. Such exceptional circumstances as accident in the
establishment or death of the employer or the like, it is necessary so to do, by order, direct that the provisions of sub-
section (1) shall not apply in relation to such establishment for such period as may be specified in the order.
(9) Where permission for retrenchment has been granted under sub-section (3) or where permission for retrenchment
is deemed to be granted under sub-section (4), every workman who is employed in that establishment immediately
before the date of application for permission under this section shall be entitled to receive, at the time of
retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay for every completed year of
continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months.]

The infirmity in retrenchment by reference to section 25N cannot be ventured to be found out without laying factual
foundation attracting applicability of the provision.

It is incumbent on the management to prove that the copies of the application as required by section 25N read with
rule 76A of the Industrial Disputes Rules, 1957, were served on the concerned workman.

Constitutional Validity of Section 25-N

In Workmen of Meenakshi Mills Ltd., etc. V. Meenakshi Mills Ltd. And another, the Supreme Court held that
Section 25-N of the Act as constitutionally valid on the ground that the restrictions imposed on the right of employer
to retrench workmen is in interest of the general public. It does not infringe Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution and
duty to pass a speaking order and affording opportunity to the parties concerned with judicial power while
functioning under sub-section (2) of Section 25-N and hence no appeal lies to Supreme Court against an order
passes under sub-section (2) of Section 25-N.

In Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation and Another v. Jabar Singh and Others, the services of the
respondent workman were retrenched by notices in compliance with Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act,
1947. Labour Court gave an award holding the retrenchment as valid. The award was challenged in the High Court
and the Court directed reinstatement with back-wages. The question for consideration was whether the corporation
was an industrial establishment within Section 25-L of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and if so whether the
retrenchment was not valid for non-compliance of Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The Supreme Court observed that the process of cutting tress by axe and changing the shape by saw and conversion
of tress into logs for purpose of sale and disposal fell within the scope of manufacturing process under Section 2-K
of the Factories Act, 1948.

The establishment of appellant was therefore, held, to be an industrial establishment under Section 25-L of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Section 25-N was applicable.

The appellant did not comply with the two requirements of Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
namely giving three month notice or wages in lieu of notice and taking permission from the appropriate government.
The retrenchment notices were therefore illegal and workmen were held entitled to be reinstatement with full back
wages and continuity of service.

SPECIAL PROVISION RELATIONG TO CLOSURE

Section 25-O Procedure for closing down an undertaking-
(1) An employer who intends to close down an undertaking of an industrial establishment to which this Chapter
applies shall, in the prescribed manner, apply, for prior permission at least ninety days before the date on which the
intended closure is to become effective, to the appropriate Government, stating clearly the reasons for the intended
closure of the undertaking and a copy of such application shall also be served simultaneously on the representatives
of the workmen in the prescribed manner: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to an undertaking set
up for the construction of buildings, bridges, roads, canals, dams or for other construction work,

(2) Where an application for permission has been made under sub-section (1), the appropriate Government, after
making such enquiry as it thinks fit and after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the employer, the
workmen! and the persons interested in such closure may, having regard to the genuineness and adequacy of the
reasons stated by the employer, the interests of the general public and all other relevant factors, by order and for
reasons to be recorded in writing, grant or refuse to grant such permission and a copy of such order shall be
communicated to the employer and the workmen.

(3) Where an application has been made under sub-section (1) and the appropriate Government does not
communicate the order granting or refusing to grant permission to the employer within a period of sixty days from
the date on which such application is made, the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted on the
expiration of the said period of sixty days.

(4) An order of the appropriate Government granting or refusing to grant permission shall, subject to the provisions
of sub-section (5), be final and binding on all the parties and shall remain in force for one year from the date of such
order.

(5) The appropriate Government may, either on its own motion or on the application made by the employer or any
workman, review its order granting or refusing to grant permission under sub-section (2) or refer the matter to a
Tribunal for adjudication: Provided that where a reference has been made to a Tribunal under this sub-section, it
shall pass an award within a period of thirty days from the date of such reference.
(6) Where no application for permission under sub-section (1) is made within the period specified therein, or where
the permission for closure has been refused, the closure of the undertaking shall be deemed to be illegal from the
date of closure and the workmen shall be entitled to all the benefits under any law for the time being in force as if
the undertaking had not been closed down.

(7) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, the appropriate Government
may, if it is satisfied that owing to such exceptional circumstances as accident in the undertaking or death of the
employer or the like, it is necessary so to do, by order, direct that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply in
relation to such undertaking for such period as may be specified in the order.

(8) Where an undertaking is permitted to be closed down under subsection (2) or where permission for closure is
deemed to be granted under sub-section (3), every workman who is employed in that undertaking immediately
before the date of application for permission under this section, shall be entitled to receive compensation which shall
be equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in
excess of six months.]

In S. G. Chemicals and Dyes Trading Employees Union v. S. G. Chemicals and Dyes Trading Limited and Others,
the respondent company was engaged in business of pharmaceuticals etc. and was operating in Bombay through
three Divisions situated at different places. The pharmaceuticals, the Dyes, and the Marketing and Sale Divisions
situated at Worly, Trombay and Churchgate respectively. The registered officer of the Company was situated at
Churchgate. The Company gave notice to the Government under Section 25-FFA (1) of its intention to close down
its Marketing and Sales Division employing 90 workmen at Churchgate. Copies of the said notice were sent to the
Commissioner of Labour, Maharashtra and the Union. Pursuant to this notice the Division of Churchgate was closed
down and the Company agreed to pay compensation under Section 25-FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The
Union protested against the termination of the services of the workmen and complained that the closure was contrary
to the provisions of Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Company had committed unfair
labour practice under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of the Unfair Labour Practice
Act, 1971. The union contended that for the purpose of Section 25-O all the workmen working in all three divisions
of the Company should be taken into consideration as there was functional integrity amongst all the three Divisions.
It was held that the Section 25-O applies to the closure of undertaking of an industrial establishment and not to the
closure of an industrial establishment. It also does not require that an undertaking of an industrial establishment
should also be an ‘industrial establishment’.

‘Undertaking’ means part of an ‘industrial establishment’. Undertaking and industrial establishment’. Undertaking
and industrial establishment taken together constitute one establishment. Section 25-O would apply to the closure of
an undertaking provided the condition laid down in Section 25-K is fulfilled. Further undertaking of an industrial
establishment need not to be a factory. Consequently it was held that the closure of the Churchgate division was
illegal as it was in contravention of the provisions of Section 25-O and the workmen whose services were terminated
on account of such illegal closure are entitled to receive their full salary.

Applicability of Section 25-O

This section deals with the permission for closure of undertaking.
InHindalco Industries Ltd v Union of India and Others, it was held that even though the closure of an undertaking
was not a planned and voluntary closure by the company Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 would
be applicable. It was also pointed out that even if an undertaking is closed for reasons beyond its control Section 25-
o would be applicable and the conditions imposed in the order of the government granting permission for the closure
were valid and binding on the appellant company.

Absorption in Service
In Managing Director, Karnataka Forest Development Corporation Ltd. v. Workmen of Karnataka Pulpawood Ltd.
And others, the private respondents were the workmen of a joint sector company. The State Government granted
necessary permission to close down the company. The matter regarding closure of the company was not in dispute.
Only the impugned order of the High Court directing the absorption of respondent’s workmen into service of the
appellant corporation is challenged in this appeal.
Allowing the appeal it was held that in the event of undertaking being closed down, the only right which assures in
favour of the workmen is to obtain compensation as provided. Both merger of two undertakings and the closure of
one undertaking do not stand together. As such if the workmen think that any other right has accrued to them, they
have to approach appropriate forum and civil writ petition is not maintainable.

Constitutionality of old Section 25-O

In Excel Wear v. Union of India, it was held that Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as a whole and
Section 25-R in so far as it relates to the awarding of punishment for infraction of the provisions of Section 25-O are
constitutionally bad and invalid for violation of Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution. It was further held that it is true
that Chapter V-B deals with certain comparatively bigger undertaking and of few types only. But with all this
difference it has not made the law reasonable. It may be a reasonable classification for saving the law from violation
of Article 14, but certainly it does not make the restriction reasonable within the meaning of Article 19 (6).
Similarly, the interest of ancillary industry cannot be protected by compelling an employer to carry on the business
if he cannot pay even the minimum wages to the labourer.

Within the meaning of Article 19(1) (g) includes right to close down the business and the fact that the citizen cannot
exercise this right as much as the permission of the State Government is required under Section 25-O before closing
down the business, infringes the right given under Article 19(1) (g). The Supreme Court judgment in Workmen of
Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Meenakshi Mills Ltd would equally apply to the provisions of Section 25-O as amended by
the Act 46 of 1986. The right to close a business is an integral part of the fundamental right to carry on business and
is guaranteed by Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution.
Constitutionality of amended Section 25-O

In Orissa Textile and Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa and Others, the constitutional validity of Section 25 as amended in
1982 was considered. This Section was struck down being unconstitutional inExcel Wear v Union of India.

In Workmen of Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Meenakshi Mills Ltd, the constitutional validity of Section 25-N was
upheld by the Supreme Court. Therefore, there had been difference of opinion among the High Courts on the
validity of Section 25-O. it was held by the Supreme Court in the present case that the amended Section 25-O was
not ultra vires the Constitution and it was saved by Article 19(6) of the Constitution on the following grounds-
(i.) Section 25-o had been enacted to give effect to the directive principles of the Constitution and was in the interest
of general public.
(ii.) Under the amended Section the order granting or refusing permission for closure has to be in writing and
reasons are to be recorded.
(iii.) Even after permission to close being given, the employer had still to give notice and compensation as specified
in Section 25-N.
(iv.) The other defect that no time limit has been fixed while refusing permission to close was now cured by sub-
sections (3), (4) and (5) of amended Section 25-O.
(v.) The restrictions imposed under the amended section were reasonable and in the interest of general public.
(vi.) As far refusal in case of reasons being genuine is concerned the interest of general public or other factors might
still justify refusal of permission, requiring that business be continued for some time.
(vii.) The phrase “in the interest of general public” was not vague but was of a definite concept.
(viii.) There was no excessive delegation of power to the executive as the guidelines had been set out in Section 25-
O.
(ix.) There is no substantive vice as the reason for refusal now shall be given in writing after inquiry and giving
opportunity of hearing. Thus, power of government was quasi-judicial.
(x.) Section 25(o) was not discriminatory between, say, a firm of lawyers and a factory or mine.
(xi.) The argument that the reasons gives inExcel Wear case, for striking down Section 25-O had been considered
inMeenakshi Mills, case and as such it was not open to the present bench to reconsider those reasons was not
acceptable to the Supreme Court. It observed that it was the duty of the Constitution Court to form its own opinion
about a given case instead of relying upon the gloss placed on that case by some other decision.

Section 25-P Special provision as to restarting of undertaking closed down before commencement of Industrial
Disputes (Amendment) Act, 1976-
If the appropriate Government is of opinion in respect of any undertaking or an industrial establishment to which
this Chapter applies and which closed down before the commencement of the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act,
1976 (32 of 1976)—
(a) That such undertaking was closed down otherwise than on account of unavoidable circumstances beyond the
control of the employer;
(b) That there are possibilities of restarting the undertaking;
(c) That it is necessary for the rehabilitation of the workmen employed in such undertaking before its closure or for
the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the life of the community to restart the undertaking or both; and
(d) That the restarting of the undertaking will not result in hardship to the employer in relation to the undertaking, it
may, after giving an opportunity to such employer and workmen, direct, by order published in the Official Gazette,
that the undertaking shall be restarted within such time (not being less than one month from the date of the order) as
may be specified in the order.

Penalty
Section 25-Q Penalty for lay-off and retrenchment without previous permission-
Any employer, who contravenes the provisions of section 25-M or section 25-N shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or
with both.

Section 25-R Penalty for closure-

(1) Any employer, who closes down an undertaking without complying with the provisions of sub-section (1) of
section 25-O shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which
may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.

(2) Any employer, who contravenes [an order refusing to grant permission to close down an undertaking under sub-
section (2) of section 25-O or a direction given under section 25P], shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both, and where the
contravention is a continuing one, with a further fine which may extend to two thousand rupees for every day during
which the contravention continues after the conviction.

It was held inExcel Wear v. Union of India, that Section 25-R in so far as it relates to the awarding of punishment
for violation of provisions of Section 25-O are constitutionally bad and invalid for violation of Article 19(1) (g) of
the Constitution.

Section 25-S Certain provisions of Chapter VA to apply to industrial establishment to which this Chapter applies-

The provisions of sections 25B, 25D, 25FF, 25G, 25H and 25J in Chapter VA shall, so far as may be, apply also in
relation to an industrial establishment to which the provisions of this Chapter apply.

Strike- Lockout under chapter X of the code.

In any Industrial endeavour co-operation of labour and capital is quite essential for its success, although they have
interests contrary to each other. They have different strategies and weapons to ventilate their grievances and
safeguard their interests. Unlike the strikes, lockout is declared by the management out of the consequences of
clashes between management and the workers, due to unjustified demands by the workers.

Introduction
In the case Management of Kairbetta v/sRajamanickam And Others on 24 March, 1960
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India court has observed as follows:
Just as a strike is a weapon available to the employees for enforcing their industrial demands, a lockout is a weapon
available to the employer to persuade by a coercive process the employees to see his point of view and to accept his
demands. In the struggle between capital and labour, the weapon of strike is available to labour and is often used by
it, so is the weapon of lockout available to the employer and can be used by him. The use of both the weapons by the
respective parties Must, however, be subject to the relevant provisions of the I D Act. Chapter V which deals with
strikes and lockouts clearly brings out the antithesis between the two weapons and the limitations subject to which
both of them must be exercised.
Strike
Strike is one of the oldest and the most effective weapons of labour in its struggle with capital for securing economic
justice.

Section 2 (q) of the Industrial Disputes Act defines:

Strike means a cessation of work by a body of persons employed in any industry acting in combination, or a
concerted refusal, or a refusal under a common understanding, of any number of persons who are or have been so
employed to continue to work or to accept employment.

The following essential requirements for the existence of a strike:

● There must be cessation of work.
● The cessation of work must be by a body of persons employed in any industry;
● The strikers must have been acting in combination;
● The strikers must be working in any establishment which can be called industry within the meaning of
Section 2(j); or
● There must be a concerted refusal; or
● Refusal under a common understanding of any number of persons who are or have been so employed to
continue to work or to accept employment;
● They must stop work for some demands relating to employment, non-employment or the terms of
employment or the conditions of labour of the workmen.

Legal Status
Section 22 of ID Act prohibits strikes in Public Utility Services and Section 23 puts a general prohibition on strikes
in any industrial establishment. Hence strikes are generally illegal. However, Section 24(3) provides that a strike
called in response to an illegal lock out will not be illegal. Besides, there are other situations when a strike can
become legal. Section 20(1) provides for commencement of conciliation proceedings when the notice is received by
the conciliation officer or on the date of the order the dispute is referred to the Board.

Until the dispute gets referred to the conciliation officer or the Board as the case may be, the conciliation does not
start. Thus, in the time window between 14 days after notice of strike is issued and before the lapse of six weeks
from the same date, a legal strike can take place in PUS, provided the dispute is yet to be referred.

Another occasion when a strike becomes legal is as follows. If a fresh notice of strike is issued on the same agenda
as the previous dispute on which the conciliation officer had submitted a failure report on, the union can go forward
with a legal strike after the mandatory 14 day cooling off period, if the government does not refer it to the Labour
Court or Industrial Tribunal. The failure of conciliation proceedings last time on same grounds will be considered
for the fresh strike notice as well.

Also, in non-PUS, no such time window is applicable. Unless otherwise prohibited or regulated by the Standing
Orders of the establishment or any existing negotiation or conciliation proceeding is going on, workmen can go for a
lightning strike.

A question may arise as to the fact that there is general prohibition on strikes in any industrial establishment vide
Sec. 23. The answer to this lies in the fact that it is prohibited only if it is in breach of contract.

The strike is illegal

1. if it is in breach of Contract of Employment.
 2. if it is in Public Utility Services.
3. if Notice under Section 22(1) is not given.
4. if commenced during Award or settlement period.
5. if commenced During or within 7 days of completion of Conciliation Proceedings.
6. if commenced During or within Two months of completion of Adjudication Proceeding

Is strike a fundamental right?

Though right to form union and right to freedom of speech and expression are guaranteed under the Constitution via
Articles 19(1) (c) and 19(1) (a) respectively, the right to strike is not derived out of it. However peaceful
demonstrations are allowed.

Justification of strike
Justification of a strike is a question of fact and has to be determined for each case. Justification means whether the
reason for which the strike was called was serious enough or had enough potential to significantly affect the
conditions of labour or terms of employment or employer employee relationships. However, use of coercion or
violence during a strike negates whatever justification a strike may have.

Implication of strike on the union Positive Implications

A strike signals the transfer of power from the employer to the union. While the employer has a right to employ and
retrench workers, in the case of a strike, the right to not come to the place of work is with the union. This transfer of
right also means higher bargaining power for the union.

A strike is also used by the union to unite its members and send a strong signal to the management. In this case,
strike also becomes an effective tool for the union to regain any lost support among the workers.

Negative Implication
The most direct implication of a strike on the workers is the non-payment of wages during the strike period. As
explained earlier, the wages might be paid at a later date only if the strike is both justified and legal. However,
during the strike period, the workers have to survive without pay.Hence, as the strike period keeps increasing, the
bargaining power of the union starts to decrease again and might go to levels lower than the pre-strike period.

Implication of strike on the Employer

Strikes directly affect the bottom line of a company. During the initial period of strike, the bargaining power of the
union is very high and employer's need to compromise is also high. The financial implication of every additional
day of strike is huge and there is immense pressure on the employer to ensure an end to the strike. However, an end
to the strike would generally mean some additional financial burden. Hence, for the employer, a strike is generally a
lose-lose situation.

Implication of strike on the government/political setup

Strikes have a huge implication on the government as well as the political set up in the area of strike. The political
parties use strikes to strike an emotional chord with the workers to maintain or enhance their vote-bank. This also
puts added pressure on the government, which has to ensure that the employer is not at a disadvantage by
compromising while at the same time the workers have to be satisfied.
Lockouts
Lockout is a work stoppage in which an employer prevents employees from working. It is declared by employers to
put pressure on their workers to come to their way by consensus about settlement of issued lead to lockout. This is
different from a strike, in which employees refuse to work. Thus, a lockout is employers' weapon while a strike is
raised on part of employees. According to [section 2(1)] of Industrial Disputes Act 1947, lock-out means the
temporary closing of a place of employment or the suspension of work or the refusal by an employer to continue to
employ any number of persons employed by him

The mention of temporary in the definition of lockout differentiates it from closure. In Mgmt of Express
Newspapers Ltd, Gajendragadkar J mentions that in case of a closure, the employer does not merely close down the
place of business; he closes the business itself. It is also mentioned that lockout is often used by the employer as a
weapon in his armoury to compel the employees to accept his proposals.

The second part of the definition talks about the refusal by the employer to continue to employ any number of
persons. This implies that the employer might refuse employment only to a certain number of employees and might
allow the others to work. However, this does not mean that lockout and layoff are similar.

Layoff and lockout is both temporary and in both cases, some employees might not get employment. The big
difference between layoff and lockout is elaborated by the Supreme Court in Kairbetta Estate v Rajamanicham.

The Supreme Court clarifies that the employer can resort to lay off only in one of the cases mentioned in Section
2(kkk) of ID Act whereas there is no such requirement in case of a lockout. Also, in case of lay off the employer
may be liable to pay compensation whereas in case of lock out there is no such liability.

Why the word lock out?

Lock made is not permanent that can be closed and opened. The word 'out' can be understood as keeping temporarily
away management and employees from the factory, till settlement of the issues caused to lockout.

Factory lockout is the ultimate weapon in the hands of the management when an uncontrollable situations arises in
the factory. No matter what it is factory lockout will cause great loss to the management and to the workers. If
lockout re-occurs, it may become threat for the existence of the factory, which finally leads to the loss of the jobs of
workers.
The Industrial Dispute Act does not intend to take away these rights.

However, the rights of strikes and lockouts have been restricted to achieve the purpose of the Act, namely peaceful
investigation and settlement of the industrial disputes.

Legal status
A lockout in contravention of sec 10(3), Sec 10A (4A) i.e. declaration of lock-out when an industrial dispute has
been referred, is an illegal lockout. Also, a lockout in contravention of sec 22, 23 i.e. issuing a notice before lockout,
is an illegal lockout (Sec 24(1)). However a lockout declared in consequence of an illegal strike is legal (Sec 24(3)).
A legal lockout can become a strong tool in the hands of the employer in critical situations.

Section 2(1) defines the term Lock-out. However, the present definition is only a mutilated one. The term was
originally and correctly defined in the Trade Dispute Act, 1929. From the definition given in the Trade Dispute Act,
the present Act has taken the present definition but has omitted the words when such closing, suspension or refusal
occurs in consequences of a dispute and is intended for the purpose of compelling those persons or of aid in another
Employer in compelling persons employed by him to accept terms or condition of, or affecting employment.
In the Case General Labour Unlon (Red Flag) v/s B. V. Chavan And Ors on 16 November, 1984 Supreme Court of
India expressed Imposing and continuing a lockout deemed to be illegal under the Act is an unfair labour practice.

In Sri Ramchandra Spinning Mills v/s State of Madras the Madras High Court read the deleted portion in the
definition to interpret the term lock-out. According to the Court, a flood may have swept away the factory, a fire
may have gutted the premises; a convulsion of nature may have sucked the whole place under ground; still if the
place of employment is closed or the work is Suspended or the Employer refuses to continue to employ his previous
workers, there would be a lock out and the Employer would find himself exposed to the penalties laid down in the
Act. Obviously, it shows that the present definition does not convey the concept of the term lock out.

Kingfisher Airlines
Kingfisher airlines of India went into losses amounts of 8,000 crores due to failure in meeting competition in the
aviation industry eventually had not paid salaries to its employees for a period of six months which led to agitation
among employees eventually resorted for strike. With the loss of Rs. 8,000 crores by Kingfisher airlines additionally
got a burden of another Rs. 7,000 crores hence declare partial lockout by its top officials on 1st September 2012.

Lockout of any factory or industry is governed by the law called the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. According to
section 22 of this Act, lockout of factory or industry must be done only after issuing prior notice to concern
employees. If not, such lockout shall be treated as illegal lockout and concerned factory or industry shall be
penalised according to the Industrial Disputes Act 1947.

Procedure of Lockouts
According to Sec. 22(2)
No person employed in a public utility service shall go on Lockout in breach of contract:
1. Without giving to the employer notice of Lockout, as hereinafter provided, within six weeks before
lockout; or
2. Within fourteen days of giving such notice; or
3. Before the expiry of the date of lockout specified in any such notice as aforesaid; or
4. During the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a conciliation officer and seven days after the
conclusion of such proceedings.
Procedure of lockout meaning
Proposal to go on lockout factory should be intimated to workers by way of prior notice, that is 14 days stipulated
time period should be given to the workers to respond . During this 14 days time employer should not lockout. Only
after expiry of the that 14 days and management fails to resolve issues within that 14 days, employer can go for
lockout on fixed date by giving notice of lockout. Such lockout should be done before the expiry of that six weeks
only.

Succinctly lockout of factory should be done only after the expiry of 14 days of prior notice given by the
management.

The Reasons Behind The Lockouts

● Disputes or clashes in between workers and the management.
● Unrest disputes or clashes in between workers and workers.
● Illegal strikes, regular strikes or continuous strikes by workers may lead to lockout of factory or industry.
● External environmental disturbance due to unstable governments, may lead to lockouts of factories or
industries.
● Continuous or accumulated financial losses of factory or industry, may lead to opt lockout by the
management.
● Maybe lockout, if any company involves in any fraudulent or illegal activities.
● Failure in maintaining proper industrial relations, industrial peace and harmony.
Facts [+] 18-july-2012, India: leading car manufacturer Maruthi Suzuki at Maneser (Haryana), workers created
extreme violence by burning alive company's general manager human resource (Awanish Kumar Dev) to death,
burnt down office furniture, injured several executives, supervisors, managers and the Japanese manager of the
factory was also attacked. 91 workers were arrested for this brutal act including causing heavy damage to the
company's property. The sequence of events began in the morning with a worker beating up a supervisor on the shop
floor.

Workers union alleges that this incident happened due to the supervisor made objectionable remark against a
permanent worker, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste category. When we opposed it, they misbehaved with us and
suspended the worker that led to violence. But the management alleges that the workers' union prevented the
management from taking disciplinary action against the worker. Finally management declared temporary close
down of the car Manufacturing plant that produces about 1600 units per day. In terms of value the per day loss is
about Rs. 70 crores. By then Cars waiting for delivery to its customers were more than one lakh units that may take
more than five months to begin delivery due to lockout.

As company manufactures market demanded key models like Swift hatchback and Dzire sedan faces a huge
backlog. Maruthi Suzuki competitors like Ford, Skoda and Hyundai got benefited in the market as many people shift
to other brands in the view of long waiting period for delivery of cars from Maruthi Suzuki.

No Payment for 2000 staff on August 1st, 2012

Company decided that no one working at the Manesar plant will be given salary. According to the rule, after the
company's lockout, workers are not paid till the time it (lockout) is revoked. The monthly salaries of its employees
for the period before the incident, will be paid only after the lockout is withdrawn and the plant starts functioning.

Workers had damaged everything like computers, server cables and entire data on July 18. Eventually company has
no records of its employees and their duty-hours details for the entire month and finally company decided to pay its
employees only after retrieving their data. [Source :TOI]

Lock-out, When Legal

The Act treats strikes and lock-out on the same basis; it treats one as the counter part of the other. (Mohammed
Sumsuddin), the circumstances under which the legislature has banned strike, it has also at the Same time banned
the lock-out. Thus what holds good-bad; legal-illegal, justified unjustified for strikes, holds the same for the lock-
out. As such, the provisions of the Act which prohibit the strike also prohibits the lock-out.

The object and reasons for which the Lock-out are banned or prohibited are the same for which strikes are banned or
prohibited. It is because the Employer and the Employees are not discriminated in their respective rights in the field
of industrial relationship between the two. As such, lock-out if not in conflict with Section 22 and 23 may be said to
be legal or not legal. Sections 24(1) (iii), 10(3) and 10A (4A) similarly controls the lock-out.

A lock-out in consequence of illegal strike is not deemed to be illegal. But if lock-out is illegal, Section 26(2), 27
and 28 will come in operation to deal with the situation. The Act does not lay down any guidelines to settle the
claims arising out of illegal lock-out. The courts, therefore, have adopted the technique of apportioning the blame
between the Employer and employees. This once again brings to the fore the concept of justifiability of lock-out.

Prohibits an employer from declaring a lockout:

in any of the eventualities mentioned therein [Section 22(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947]
No employer carrying on any public utility service shall lock-out any of his workman:
 1. without giving them notice of lock-out as hereinafter provided, within six weeks before locking-out; or
2. within fourteen days of giving such notice; or
3. before the expiry of the date of lock-out specified in any such notice as aforesaid; or
4. during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a conciliation officer and seven days after the
conclusion of such proceedings

Implication of lockout on the government or Political set up

Given the tripartite set up of industrial relations in the Indian context, the government plays a very important role in
the case of a lockout. Reference of the industrial dispute for adjudication is the step taken by the government which
ensures that there are no legal strikes or lockouts.

A declaration of a lockout leaves the workers unemployed and creates an environment of instability. This has
political ramifications and is often exploited by political institutions to their advantage. Hence, in the case of a
lockout, the government pressure on management to allow production would be much more than the government
pressure on union to resume work in case of a strike.

Conclusion
India in the present context of economic development programs cannot afford the unqualified right to the workers to
strike or to the employer to lock-out. Compulsory arbitration as an alternative of collective bargaining has come to
stay. The adoption of compulsory arbitration does not, however, necessarily mean denial of the right to strike or
stifling of trade union movement. If the benefits of legislation, settlements and awards are to reach the individual
worker, not only the trade union movement has to be encouraged and its outlook broadened but the laws have also
be suitably tailored.

The existing legislation and judicial pronouncements lack breadth of vision. Indeed, the statutory definitions of
strike and lock-out have been rendered worse by a system of interpretation which is devoid of policy-oriented
approach and which lays undue stress on semantics.

The discussion of the concepts and definition of strike has sought to establish that legalistic consideration has
frequently weighed with the court in interpreting and expounding the said statutory definition: We believe that
emphasis on literal interpretation resulted in ignoring the ordinarily understood connotation of the term strike and in
encouraging undesirable activity.

We now pass on to acts which constitute strike. Unlike the Industrial Relations Bill, 1978 the three phrases used in
the definition of strike in IDA are not qualified by the expression total or partial. Further, they do not specifically
take into account go-slow. The Courts have accordingly excluded go-slow from the purview of strike. However, the
exclusion of go-slow from the ambit of strike throws them open to the third party suits for damages.
Unit-III

Authorities under the ID(Industrian dispute) Code

The Industrial disputes Act 1947, was enacted in the post-independence era with a view to regulate the relationships
of the employer and employee and to maintain peace and harmonious relations between the two. Earlier the growth
was very slow but in recent years it has taken grown due to growing cases in the supreme court. The growth of the
country in the sense of economic development is dependant upon the industries and the industries could only run
smoothly when there is a harmonious relationship between the two pillars.

Objectives of the Industrial disputes act 1947

The Industrial dispute act of 1947 was enacted with the following objectives:-
a) To promote industrial peace
b) To do economic justice to the workmen
The objective according to the preamble of the Industrial disputes act 1947 are:
a) To make provisions for investigation and settlement of industrial disputes.
b) The objective of all the labor legislation is to ensure fair wages and to prevent industrial disputes.

Scope and Extent of the Industrial Disputes act 1947

The Industrial disputes act of 1947 extends to the whole of India. it came into enforcement on 1st April 1947.

Principal objects as stated by the supreme court in the case of Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate vs Management of
Dimakuchi Tea Estate AIR 1958 SC
1) the act aims to promote the measures which are helpful in securing good and amity relations between the
employer and the employee.
2) An investigation and settlement of disputes between an employer and the employee, employer and workmen,
workmen and workmen and giving them the right of representation in the trade unions.
3) the legislation also tries to do away with illegal strikes and lockouts.
4) it also helps to provide the relief to the workmen in the matter of lay off, retrenchment, closure of undertaking,
etc.
5) it helps to do Collective Bargaining.
The Industrial disputes act is social legislation which tries to maintain a balance between the interest of the
important pillars of the industrial establishment.

What do you understand by the term Employer?

The term employer has been defined under the industrial dispute act of 1947 under section 2(g) the employer
according to the definition is the person authorized to do the work in the capacity as an employer under the
leadership of either the Central Government or the state government or the local authority.

What do you understand by the term Industry?

The term Industry is defined under section 2(j) of the act as any business, trade or undertaking manufacture or
calling and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft or industrial occupation or avocation of workmen.

an industry exists only where there is a relationship between the employer and the employee and where the former is
engaged in business trade or undertaking and the later is engaged in any calling service employment or handicraft.

The triple test was laid down in the case of Banglore water supply vs A.Rajappa AIR 1978 SC, where it was laid
down that there should be a systematic activity, organized by the cooperation between the employer and the
employee, for the production of goods and services.

What do you mean by the term workmen?

The term workmen have been defined under section 2(s) of the act which states that workmen mean a person who is
employed in any industry to carry put skilled, unskilled, manual, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work.

Authorities under the act:-

There are various authorities under the act such as the works committee, conciliation officer, conciliation board,
courts of inquiry, labour court, tribunal, national tribunal.
Works Committee:
This has been defined under section 3 of the act which says that each industrial establishment should have a works
committee and the works committee will have equal representations from both the employer and the employee. it is
to try to settle the dispute in the first instance through the process of mediation in the initial stage of the dispute. The
works committee also time to time comments upon the matters in dispute.

Conciliation officer:
Section 4 of the Industrial disputes act 1947 talks about the provisions of the conciliation officer. it states that the
appropriate government i.e. the central government, state government or the local authority will appoint such
number of persons to be the conciliation officer as it thinks fit.

it is the duty of the conciliation officer to mediate and promote the settlement of industrial dispute. The conciliation
officer can be appointed either permanently or for some point of time.

Board of Conciliation:
The board of conciliation are constituted under section 5 by the appropriate government.

The board of conciliation s constituted in order to promote the settlement of industrial dispute.

The board appointed consists of the chairman and two or four other members. under the board the chairman is the
independent person and the other persons appointed in equal numbers which represents the parties in disputes and
the person who represents the party shall be appointed by the party . the party needs to appoint such representatives
within the time prescribed and if the party fails to appoint the representatives within the time then the appropriate
government can appoint the person to be the representative of the party.

A board needs to work according to the quorum prescribed but if the chairman or the other member as the case may
be ceased to be available the board shall not act until a new chairman or member as the case may be has been
appointed.

Courts of Inquiry:
the section 6 of the act further talks about the constitution of the court of inquiry in order to conduct inquiry upon
the matter in dispute.the court of inquiry to be run by the independent person or persons as the appropriate
government thinks fit. where the court consists of two or more persons then any one of them shall be appointed to be
chairman.

Labour Court:
section 7 of the act talks about the constitution of the labor court by the appropriate government. it can create one or
more labor court as it thinks fit for the adjudication of industrial dispute as specified under schedule II. it consists of
one person to be appointed by the appropriate government. the qualifications of the presiding officer of the court
shall be as follows:-
a) if he is or has been a judge of the high court
b) he has for a period of not less than 3 years being a district judge or an additional district judge
c) has held judicial office for not less than 7 years
d) he has been the presiding officer of a Labor Court constituted under any Provincial Act or State Act for not less
than five years.
e) he is or has been a Deputy Chief Labor Commissioner (Central) or Joint Commissioner of the State Labor
Department, having a degree in law and at least seven years' experience in the labor department including three
years of experience as Conciliation Officer.
f) he is an officer of Indian Legal Service in Grade I with years' experience in the grade.

Tribunal:
section 7A deals with the provision of constitution of the one or more tribunal for the adjudication of dispute relating
to the aspects as mentioned in schedule second or third. tribunal to consist of one person who shall be appointed by
appropriate government.

The qualifications of the presiding officer of the tribunal are as follows:-

a) he is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court;

b) he has, for a period of not less than three years, been a District Judge or an Additional District Judge;

c) he is or has been a Deputy Chief Labor Commissioner (Central) or Joint Commissioner of the State Labor
Department,, having a degree in law and at least seven years' experience in the labor department including three
years of experience as Conciliation Officer:

d) he is an officer of Indian Legal Service in Grade III with three years' experience in the grade.
the appropriate government to appoint two persons as assessors to advise the tribunal.

National Tribunal:
section 7B deals with the national tribunal which is appointed by the central government constitute one or more
national tribunal for the adjudication of industrial disputes which in the opinion of the central government involves
questions of national importance or are of such a nature that industrial establishments situated in more than one state
are likely to be interested in or affected by such disputes. the national tribunal shall be consisted of one person only
to be appointed by the central government. in order to be appointed as the presiding officer of a national tribunal he
should be or has been a judge of a high court. the central government can also appoint two persons as assessors to
advise the national tribunal in the proceeding before it.

Disqualifications for appointment of the presiding officer of labor court, tribunal and national tribunal:
section 9 c of the act talks about the provision relating to the disqualification of the presiding officer which states
that if the person is not an independent person or if he has attained the age of 65 years then he cannot be appointed
as the presiding officer of the labor court or tribunal or national tribunal by the central government.

Works Committee (Section 3):

The works committee is a committee consisting of representatives of employers and workmen (section3). The works
committee is a forum for explaining the difficulties of all the parties.The main objective of the works committee is
to solve the problems arising in the day-to-day working of a concern and to secure industrial harmony. The function
of the working committee is to ascertain the grievances of the employees and to arrive at some agreement. The
committee is formed by general or special order by the appropriate Government in an industrial establishment in
which 100 or more workmen are employed or have been employed on any day in the preceding 12 months. It
consists of the representatives of employers and workmen engaged in the establishment.

It shall be the duty of the working committee to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good
relations between the employers and workmen and, to that end, to comment upon matters of their common interest
or concern and to endeavour to compose any material difference of opinion in respect of such matters and decision
of the works committees are not binding.
Conciliation officer (Section 4):
For promoting and settlement of industrial disputes the appropriate Government may by notification in the official
Gazette, appoint such number of conciliation officer as it thinks fit. The main objective of appointing conciliation
officer is to create congenial atmosphere within the industry and reconcile the disputes of the workers and the
employers. He may be appointed for a specified area or for specified industries in a specified area or for one or more
specified industries and either permanently or for a limited period.

The duty of the conciliation officer is not judicial but administrative. He has to hold conciliation proceedings,
investigate the disputes and do all such things as he thinks fit for the purpose of inducing the parties to arrive at a
fair settlement of the disputes. The conciliation officer is entitled to enter an establishment to which the dispute
relates, after reasonable notice and also to call for and inspect any document which he consider relevant. He has to
send a report and memorandum of settlement to appropriate Government. The report by the conciliation officer has
to be submitted within 14 days of the commencement of the conciliation proceeding or shorter period as may be
prescribed by the appropriate Government. The conciliation officer has the power to enter the premises as well can
call for and inspect documents.

Boards of Conciliation (Section 5):

The appropriate Government may by notification in the official Gazette, constitute a Board of Conciliation for the
settlement of industrial disputes. The Board shall consist of a chairman and 2 or 4 other members in equal numbers
representing the parties to the disputes as the appropriate Government thinks fit. The Chairman shall be an
independent person. A person is “independent” for the purpose of appointment to a Board, Court or Tribunal if he is
uncommitted with the dispute or with any industry directly affected by such dispute.

He may be a shareholder of a company connected with or likely to be affected by such disputes. But in such a case
he must disclose to the Government the nature and intent of his share [Section 2(i)]. Where the appropriate
Government is of the opinion that any industrial disputes exist in an industry, it may refer by order in writing to the
Board of Conciliation for settling industrial disputes.

The Board of Conciliation has to bring about a settlement of the dispute. He has to send a report and memorandum
of settlement to appropriate Government. He has to send a full report to the Appropriate Government setting for the
steps taken by the Board in case no settlement is arrived at. The Board of Conciliation has to communicate the
reasons to the parties if no further reference is made. The Board has to submit its report within 2 months of the date
on which the dispute was referred to it within the period what the appropriate Government may think fit. The report
of the Board shall be in writing and shall be signed by all the members of the Board.

Court of Inquiry (Section 6):

The appropriate Government may by notification in the official Gazette, constitute a court of inquiry into any matter
appearing to be connected with or relevant to settlement of industrial disputes having an independent person or of
such independent persons as the appropriate Government may think fit. The court consists of two or more members
one of whom shall be appointed by the Chairman. Within a period of 6 months, the court has to send a report
thereon to the appropriate Government from the commencement of its any inquiry. This period is not mandatory and
it may be extend.

It has the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, in the following
matters-
a. enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath,
b. compelling the production of documents and material objects,
c. issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses,

d. in respect of such other matters as may be prescribed.

The report of the Court must be signed by all the members. A member can submit a note of dissent. The Report
together with the dissenting note must be published by the appropriate Government within 30 days from its report. A
court of enquiry has no power to improve any settlement upon the parties.

Tribunals - Powers and Functions of Authorities

Introduction
As administrative Tribunal has existed in introductory form from some time, in the year 1958, the Law Commission
suggested the foundation of these tribunals to relieve to the courts from the stress of litigation as the number of cases
are increasing day by day. These tribunals consist of judicial as well as administrative members to resolve service
matters[1].

The Central Government also established a committee under the chairmanship of Justice J.C Shah of the Supreme
Court of India in the year 1969, which also made similar recommendations[2]. The Swaran Singh Committee
proposes the same idea of setting up of Tribunal in the year 1975. The purpose of setting up pf administration
council is to safeguard the court from the avalanche of writ petitions and request in administration matters.

This too discovered kindness with the supreme court of India in case of K.K Dutta v. Union of India[3]. It was
against this backdrop that the Parliament brings the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976 which included Part
XlV-A to the Constitution. Article 323 enabled Parliament to build up administrative tribunals to control issues like
recruitment and states of administration of people designated to open administrations and posts in regards to the
matters of affiliation or of any state or whatever other neighbourhood body that comes in the domain of India or
heavily influenced by the Indian government or of any enterprise claimed or compelled by the legislature.

At the same time, Article 323-B enables the suitable governing body, i.e. both the State legislature and the
Parliament of India to set up a tribunal for the arbitration or trial of any dispute, offences or objections related to the
matters like collection and enforcement of tax, the ceiling on the public property and some other issues.

Parliament was additionally enabled to recommend by the law of the jurisdiction, authority, power and strategy of
such tribunals. Except for the Supreme Court, all other Courts jurisdiction was excluded under Article 136[4]. After
examining all these provisions of the Constitution, Parliament established Administrative Council Act 1985 which
became effective on November 1, 1985, for the foundation of administrative tribunals or courts for determining
service disputes of civil servants of the Centre and State.

Evolution Of Tribunal System In India

In India, managerial settling grows after freedom and different government assistance laws was proclaimed, which
vested the government of choosing detached issues on the hands of the organization. The propelled Indian Republic
brought into the world with a government assistance state. Hence, the administration weight to give a large group of
government assistance administration to the individuals was massive.

These quasi-judicial power acquired by the government body led to various enormous cases concerning their
department. The court held that these bodies should maintain procedure as prescribed by the law while arriving at
their decisions, and these bodies must stick to the principle of natural justice which was justified the 14th law
commission report. Some tribunals have been made by the legislature to provide a speedy, modest and decentralised
determination of disputes coming out of different welfare legislature.

Soon after the independence, these tribunals were set up in India. The main advantage of adjudicatory function is to
carry out by the statutory tribunals created by the governing body to decide upon the certain disputes arising from
admin decisions or to decide issues judicially.

These various administrative tribunals were governed by the statutes, rules and regulations determined by both
Central as well as State government. Some of these tribunals are:
 1. Central Administrative Tribunals:
In 1985 the Central Administration Tribunal was formed with the objective of adjudication of disputes.
�
2. Customs and Excise Revenue Appellate Tribunal:
This Tribunal was established for adjudicating complaints or offences related to the customs and excise
revenue in the year 1986. The Appeals from the orders of this Custom and Excise tribunal lies with the
Supreme Court of India.
�
3. Election Commission:
This Commission was formed in the year 1950 with an aim for deciding matters related to the election. This
Tribunal allots election symbols to the parties and all the offence related to the election are handle by this
Tribunal. The decision given by this Tribunal can also be challenged in the Supreme Court of India.
4. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal:
This Tribunal was constituted in the year 1961 under the Income Tax Act. These Tribunals have various
offices in various cities who governs all the offences related to Income Tax. An aggrieved person can file
an appeal in both the High Court and Supreme Court if an order is passed by the Commissioner or Director
of income tax against that person.
�
5. Railway Rates Tribunal:
In 1989, this Tribunal was formed under the Indian Railway Act. This Tribunal adjudicates all the matters
related to the railway administration. These matters can be connected to the unfair changes or low rates
charged by the railway administration. The appeal can be filed against this Tribunal in the supreme court.

The period of emergency plays a vital role in the advancement of tribunals in India. At that time, it was clear that the
executive did not want the legal executive to interfere with their formative plans and other decisions. Such as
removing of disputes related to the election from the President office, Prime Minister and Lok Sabha Speaker
beyond judicial scrutiny.

This issue was later on discussed in the year 1976 at the Chief Secretaries Conference and from all these discussions
and reports of the different bodies stated above, the Parliament enacted the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act 1976.

The Parliament inserted Article 323A and 323B in the Constitution under which various tribunals were formed, and
they were given the power to deal with the matters. Article 323A allows the Parliament allows the administrative
tribunals to decide the issues whereas Article 323B allow the appropriate legislature to create law for these tribunals
to determine the matter.

Difference between Court and Tribunals

There is a slight contrast between the tribunals and courts yet a similar way they additionally have a few similitude's
too. A portion of these similitude's are the two of them are represented by the State, have legal powers and are not
temporary. These two are adjudicating bodies made to deal with the disputes, yet the two of them are not the same as
one another. The contrast between them makes them two distinct governing bodies.

A court of law is the fundamental thing of the judicial system, and the State gives judicial power to the court. The
civil court has the intensity of the legal executive to settle the issues of civil nature into the trial. These courts can't
attempt the cases which are barred by the State while choosing the case the appointed authorities are liberated from
the executive.

The Officer adjudicating the claim needs to adhere to legal guidelines and procedure in the court as the cases in
court is decided based on the precedent, principle of estoppel and other laws as determined by the Constitution.
Whereas, the Tribunal is an agency formed by the statute. The Tribunal is an executive part of a state which
performs judicial and administrative functions. The tribunals are term as a semi-legal body administered by the
State.
These councils can arbitrate particular type of cases according to the Statutes. These cases are to be settled by the
Administrative Tribunal under the authority of the official executive. These tribunals don't have the proper
prescribed rules as it follows the principle of natural justice. These tribunals don't have the appropriate prescribed
rules as it follows the principle of natural justice.

The members of Tribunal are expertise in the field of administration as they do not have the uniform training of law.
The principles of law are not followed by administrative Tribunal harshly. These tribunals cannot decide 'vires' of
the suit though the court can. In this way, both the Court of Law and Tribunal is not the same as one another as they
play out similar function various manners.

Judicial Analysis of the Powers and Functions of the Administrative Tribunals

The Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 allows a special leave to the Supreme Court as per Article 136 of the
Constitution. It is a special provision and protects all the cases that do not fall under Article 132-134. The provision
to grant leave under Article 136 is on the discretion of the Supreme Court to allow appeal before itself, from any
judgment, determination, an order made by any Tribunal or any court in any case or matter.

Therefore, as per Article 136, the laws of the courts and Tribunal can be appealed before the Supreme Court.
However, what is a tribunal is a matter of Tribunal, and the Supreme Court of India interpreted this in its various
Judgements as in the case of Bharat Bank v. Employees of Bharat Bank [5]question was arise before the five-judge
bench that whether the Supreme Court can entertain the appeal filed under Article 136 against an order of the
Industrial Tribunal or not. Justice Mukherjee believed that the Supreme Court could not grant the special leave as
the Tribunal functions were more similar to the administrative functions rather than judicial function.

Therefore award by the Industrial Tribunal cannot be challenged before the Supreme court, but this statement was
contradicted by the majority of the judges in this case. As justice Mahajan and Chief justice, Kania believed that the
Industrial Tribunal has all the necessary functions similar to the other courts. They discharge no other duty other
than deciding the disputes and such Tribunals can be characterised as the quasi-judicial body as it is outside the
scope of the regular judicial hierarchy as the functions of these Tribunals are judicial.

The same related question was arise in the case of J&K Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. Iron and Steel Mazdoor Union,
Kanpur[6] that the jurisdiction and authority of Industrial Tribunal are same as to the capability of the civil court.
The court said these tribunals are not similar to the courts as they perform quasi-judicial functions and the Supreme
court can over-ride the jurisdiction as per the Article 136 of the Constitution.

As per the Constitution of India, A hierarchy system is set under which higher Courts have a definitive position, and
every other court goes under it to control all activity of subjective just as supreme forces. As for another case of
Harinagar Sugar Mills v. Shyam Sunder[7], the court held that the Tribunals are the part of a court which was set up
by a State according to the Constitution to practice legal capacities. It must exercise the ability to pick due to the
endorsement of the law, not by voluntary submissions of the parties to its jurisdiction like a court, must decide the
case equitably and reasonably. The ambit of the word 'court' is broader than council.

All the courts are Tribunal, yet all tribunals are not courts. The articulation tribunal implies the seat of an appointed
judge or an official courtroom of justice[8]. Therefore, it was finally concluded by the court that the word 'tribunal'
in Article 136, the expectation was to give comparative importance as 'court' as in the case of Bharat Bank v.
Representatives of Bharat Bank[9].

However, in another example of Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Raghuraj Singh and Ors, it was held that the word
'tribunal' stated in Article 136 of the Constitution is not the same as the Court. In any case, it incorporates inside its
ambit as Tribunal is additionally an arbitrating body established by the State as perform same the functions as the
court.

Further in Engineering Mazdoor Sabha v. Hind Cycles Ltd[10].

The court said that the two conditions must be satisfied for invoking Article 136(1) of the Constitution:
 ● The complained act must be of judicial or quasi-judicial nature is different from executive or administrative
action.
● The authority whose act has been complained against should be either a court or a tribunal.
Moreover, the court differentiates a tribunal from the court. The court said that the expression 'court' in the practical
sense is a tribunal established by a State as a part of the court which contributed to the State's natural legal forces. A
tribunal as recognised from a court practices a statutory authority and decide the matters that came before it
judicially or semi judicially, yet doesn't constitute a court in the practical sense.

As per the dictionary meaning the word tribunal means a seat of justice and while discharging its functions, it shares
some of the court's functions. The local tribunals appointed in the departmental proceeding, and the administrative
tribunals are also not covered under the scope of Article 136(1).

Tribunals which are considered by Article 136 (1), are dressed with a portion of the powers of the court. The
Tribunal can ask the witnesses to appear before them by following specific rules and regulations. A technical state of
evidence does not bound these tribunals, but the case is decided based on evidence present before them. These
decisions are compatible with the natural principles of law.

As per Article 136, any authority or body which is constituted by the State becomes a tribunal which follows the
state inherent judicial power. In the case of Durga Shankar Mehta v. Raghuraj Singh[11], the court concluded that
the Tribunal, including all other governing bodies, are constituted by the State to perform Judicial function.

As per Article 136, the power given to the Constitution is in the idea of exceptional or residuary powers given to the
Supreme Court a whole locale in the matter of engaging interests, by allowing of allowing special leave against any
sort of judgment or request made by a court or council. The court also sees the scope of Article 136 which State that
a regular court can-not appeal against the order passed by the tribunals.

Article 136 presents an optional force on the Supreme Court to give Special leave to offer from the request for any
council in the domain of India[12]. The State of disclosing is perhaps annexed to a solicitation made by the
assembly when it works judicially as a court in an almost modest number of issues and not concerning other
authoritative order it passes.

Further, the court said in the case of Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [13]that the principle of
natural justice needs a quasi-judicial tribunal not to make any decision against the party without giving them the
opportunity of safeguarding himself against the claim charged against him. However, that depends on the facts and
circumstances of each case, and the Tribunal has complete discretion over it.

As to demand from the Tribunal, it can be seen that in uncommon and extraordinary conditions, the Supreme Court
would not practice its ability under Article 136 to evade the High Court by engaging an appeal directly from the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and therefore dismiss the decision given by the High Court[14]. The court held in
case of L. Chandra Kumar v. Relationship of India [15]that according to Article 226 high court has judicial power
given to the court to review over legislative activity and a similar power is given to the Supreme court according to
Article 32 of the Constitution. Further, it opined that the tribunals are capable of hearing the issues where the vires
of lawfully questioned.

Notwithstanding, the tribunals, while giving their duty, can't act option of the Supreme court and the high court,
which has, under the constitutional setup to enabled with such a commitment. Their ability in such manner merely is
valuable, and each such decision of the council committee will be based upon assessment before a division seat of
the particular High Court.

The Tribunal will accordingly test the vires of subordinate authorizations and rules. In any case, the tribunal power
will be subject as a specific case that, these tribunals won't engage any inquiry related to the vires of the parent
statues following the establishment rule by the Tribunal which is made by an assembly can't be said as
unconstitutional. In these cases, the Tribunal approach directly to the respective high court.

Every other decision of the Tribunal will similarly rely upon examination before a Division Bench of their particular
High Court. Through this case, the Supreme court try to shield the jurisdiction of the courts from encroachment by
the governing body by invoking the doctrine of 'fundamental features of the Constitution'.

Conclusion
The main reason behind the foundation of the administrative Tribunal is to provide justice to the civil servants,
which is somehow missing in the traditional system. These Tribunals are much useful as it gives the decision faster
than the court and is more cost-effective for the parties.

The Supreme court has said that before taking up the appellant powers as per Article 136, the individual must uphill
the statutory remedies given to him. Indeed, this is the self-imposed rule of the court to check the range of
proceeding before the court. The Supreme Court said this in the case of Chandi Prasad Chokhani v. the State of
Bihar[16]. It would thus be able to see that the Supreme Court cannot just be engaged in the cases from the regular
court.

Yet, in addition, the instances controlled by all arbitrating bodies contributed to legal capacities. It doesn't make a
difference that the rule enabling such governing bodies with an intensity of adjudication doesn't accommodate
further interests and gives convincing certainty to the decisions of the Tribunal[17].

The exceptional leave to a request can be allowed by the summit court if the settling bodies including councils don't
watch the standards of regular equity particularly in situations where the adjudicating authorities have given no
purpose behind the choice. Additionally, advance by special leave will be permitted by the Supreme Court just in
cases where there is a probability of substantial and grave injustice. Therefore, Administrative Tribunals will go far
as a supplementary dispute resolution will help in limiting the number of cases pending under the watchful eye of
the court.

Voluntary Arbitration:

Introduction

Arbitration is a system by which disputes are resolved. It is an alternative dispute resolution form by which disputes
are resolved outside the courts. Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted to one or more persons
who act as arbitrator or arbitrators and solve the dispute by giving a decision. The decision will be legally binding on
both parties who submitted their disputes by agreement. It will be enforceable in a court of law. This is a process by
which a dispute is resolved through a private dispute resolution procedure. The arbitrator hears the facts and
arguments of both parties and then gives his judgement on that particular matter. The method of arbitration is less
formal and less expensive than a courtroom hearing or trial. So parties have often agreed to resolve their disputes
through this procedure.

Arbitration mainly arises due to the presence of an arbitration clause in a contract where the parties have decided to
resolve their disputes through the process of arbitration if any dispute arises out of the contract. Arbitration is most
often used to solve commercial disputes.

What is a voluntary arbitration

An important objective of industrial law is to resolve industrial disputes peacefully and expeditiously. Arbitration
can either be mandatory or voluntary. In order to achieve this objective, it is necessary that there must be speedy
disposal of disputes and effective means for their resolution. In India, the decision or judgement given by the
arbitrators is binding and can be overturned by the courts only as per the Arbitration Act. In the case of mandatory
arbitration, also known as forced arbitration, one must go through arbitration. On the other hand, in cases of
voluntary arbitration, the parties decide to resolve their disputes through the process of arbitration.
Voluntary arbitration is a process of settling disputes by submitting the issue to an independent and neutral third
party for a final and binding decision, which is mainly said to be an ‘award’ or ‘decision’. Arbitration in some form
has an important place in most of the government systems of labour dispute settlement and is also at times used
voluntarily by disputing parties for settling their disputes. The terms of collective agreements may be provided to
deal explicitly with rights disputes originating out of the agreement, as is common in the United States and Canada,
or to deal with interest disputes that are occurring elsewhere.

Voluntary arbitration, though an easier method of settling disputes, was still not encouraged in India before 1956.
After several criticisms of the conciliation and adjudication system, it led to the introduction of Section 10A relating
to voluntary arbitration by the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 1956. This amendment, to some extent, gave
binding force to voluntary arbitration.

Voluntary arbitration takes place when two parties voluntarily or mutually agree to submit their issue to a third
party. It is normally done by parties entering into a formal, written agreement. This is a binding adversarial dispute
resolution process where the disrupting parties decide to choose one or more arbitrators to hear their disputes and
give a final decision on that matter.

In the industrial sector, collective bargaining has been adopted as an important method of regulating labour-
management relations. One of the alternative methods of collective bargaining is voluntary arbitration. When
negotiation fails, arbitration may prove to be a satisfactory and easier method of settling industrial disputes.

Voluntary arbitration is of great significance, especially in the industrial sector, because it is

1. assumed to take into consideration the realities of the situation;

2. expected to meet the desire of the parties;
3. voluntary whim of both parties;
4. expected to dissolve the dispute in private with mutual trust; and
5. expected to dissolve the dispute between themselves without compromising their position.

Features of voluntary arbitration

Section 10A(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, permits the parties to make a reference to the voluntary
arbitrator. Nevertheless, before a reference may be made to the arbitrator, four conditions must be met :

1. Industrial disputes must exist or be apprehended;

2. The agreement made by the parties must be in writing;
3. Under Section 10A, the reference must be made before a dispute has been referred to a labour court,
tribunal or national tribunal;
4. The name of the arbitrator or arbitrators must be specified.

Some essentials of voluntary arbitration are as follows:

● Submission of the dispute to the arbitrator must be voluntary.

● Investigation and examination of witnesses.
 ● The decision is not necessarily binding on the parties.
● Disputes arising out of agreements between the parties.

Voluntary arbitration takes mainly two forms:

1. Pre-dispute arbitration: There must be a contract between the parties before the dispute arises
through an arbitration clause.
2. Post-dispute arbitration: There may not be an arbitration clause beforehand, but the parties may enter
into an agreement after the dispute arises to resolve the dispute through arbitration.

When is voluntary arbitration needed

In almost every country, rights disputes are adjudicated by a court or tribunal, with few exceptions. Where an
arbitration system is established by collective agreements, it most often acts more like adjudication than arbitration.

Voluntary arbitration is mainly used on an ad hoc basis, with the appointment of individual arbitrators or by way of
arbitration boards set up to deal with specific disputes. When arbitration boards are established, they generally
include representatives of both workers and employers. Both in the case of individuals and boards, the question
arises of how to figure out appropriate arbitrators for a specific dispute that has arisen. Arbitration tribunals, courts,
or other bodies may be established by the government.

The majority of the legislation for dispute settlement systems makes provision for the voluntary submission of
disputes to be legally binding arbitration, which is the most commonly used form of arbitration. There are various
ways of encouraging and promoting voluntary arbitration, including:

● granting it a statutory basis;

● making arbitration decisions or awards legally binding on the disrupting parties;
● offering machinery and facilities for arbitration;
● providing that a conciliator should attempt to convince the parties to submit the dispute to arbitration if
conciliation is unsuccessful; or
● empowering the conciliator to arbitrate a dispute with the consent of both parties.

Where provisions are made by legislation for voluntary arbitration, it usually requires the disputing parties to submit
their agreement to arbitration. This may take place at any stage of the dispute after the competent authority becomes
aware of it, or, as is usually provided if conciliation is unsuccessful. In some cases, this may simply be left to the
parties to decide as part of the content of their collective agreements.

In many countries, the legislation requires the conciliator or another authority to submit the dispute to an arbitration
procedure, yet the parties retain the right to reject the award or decision within a specified period after it is issued,
thereby imparting a voluntary character to the award or decision.

The legislation that establishes voluntary arbitration procedures may provide for the submission of disputes to the
arbitration body by:

● the request of both parties; or

● the conciliation body with the consent of or at the request of both parties; or
 ● the conciliation body or other authority, considering the right of the parties to reject the award or
decision after it is issued.

Provisions of law dealing with voluntary arbitration

Section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, gives parties the choice of entering into an agreement for
voluntarily resolving their disputes through arbitration before it has been referred by the government to the Labour
Court or Industrial Tribunals. The Section mentions that there can be an odd number of arbitrators, and in the case of
an even number of arbitrators, an umpire should be appointed, as is mentioned in the agreement. The agreement to
arbitrate has to be sent to the appropriate government, which shall ensure its publication within a period of one
month of receiving it in the Official Gazette. The arbitration agreement must be in such form as may be prescribed,
and it must be signed by the parties to the contract.

The government shall make sure that those who are not parties to the agreement but are involved with or affected by
the dispute get an opportunity to put forward their case before the arbitral tribunal, and a notification to that effect
has to be issued. The arbitrators have to investigate, examine, and submit a report to the appropriate government.
Where a notification has been issued to the concerned parties, the government can prohibit the continuation of
ongoing strikes and lockouts. The section also clearly excludes the application of the Arbitration Act of 1940, as it
has been replaced by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

An important question faced during the process of interpreting was whether Section 10A, i.e., arbitration, was
statutory in nature or not. It is necessary to understand whether a decision or judgement given by the arbitrator could
be challenged in a higher court or not. As the implementation of the Arbitration Act, which usually provided for the
method and requirement for setting aside the decision of the arbitrator, had been excluded, the only remedy was to
go to the high courts or the Supreme Court via Article 226 and Article 136, respectively.

Difference between voluntary and mandatory arbitration

Arbitration takes place in case of a dispute over a contract or other legal matter. Arbitration is the method of settling
disputes by having a neutral party review and help settle the dispute. The process of arbitration helps keep disputes
from going to court and may be either mandatory or voluntary.

In mandatory arbitration, the disputing parties are required to go to a neutral party for review and help settle the
dispute. If the contract itself is valid and includes an arbitration clause, the parties must abide by the clause. The
arbitration may also be ordered by the court as a measure to prevent a situation from going to trial, and the parties
must abide by it or face possible sanctions. This often happens in the workplace, where workers are made to sign a
binding mandatory arbitration clause as a requirement for getting a job or are ordered to do so afterwards with the
risk of being fired on the spot.

In voluntary arbitration, the parties involved agreed on their own to refer their matter to an outside party, like an
arbitration attorney, to help settle their disputes. There is no law that states that arbitration is required for settling a
dispute, yet deciding to use arbitration can save money, time, and sometimes even goodwill. These are mostly
important in business relationships. If the matter is personal, like in the case of a divorce proceeding, voluntary
arbitration can be equally valuable.

The main difference between the two is that in voluntary arbitration the parties involved mutually give their consent
to submit to the third party for covering and settling down the conflicts by their own wish; on the other hand, in
mandatory arbitration, which is also known as compulsory or forced arbitration, the parties involved are ordered or
instructed to move to the third party for settling down the disputes as a compulsion to resolve their matter.
Voluntary arbitration and labour policy

Voluntary arbitration is a very useful and convenient way for settling industrial disputes. Labour policy is of great
importance, especially in a planned economy like India. It is a very useful method of settling disputes that is
supplementary to collective bargaining. This method gives both parties the opportunity to discuss their issues in
confidence with the arbitrator. Voluntary arbitration provides a chance to get the dispute settled by a person they
prefer. It is very helpful for the weaker section of society in maintaining industrial peace and harmony. Therefore,
voluntary arbitration is a more convenient method of dispute settlement than adjudication in the long run.

The Standing Labour Committee at the 17th session restated its recommendations relating to voluntary arbitration
and also suggested a few measures for securing increased recourse to voluntary arbitration, which will help in
amending the difficulties faced while working in the system:

1. Voluntary arbitration in its present state does not bind workers of a trade union who enters into an
agreement with the employer. Amendment of the relevant Act should be made so that the decisions
become binding on all the employees, irrespective of whether they belong to the union or not. While
amending the Act, the recent judgements of the Supreme Court should be taken into consideration
while framing the proposed legislation.
2. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, places certain restraints on the parties while referring a dispute to a
Tribunal. These should also be applicable to the parties if they take recourse to voluntary arbitration.
3. A list of persons should be prepared by the central and state governments who would accept the
responsibility of acting as arbitrators after consulting the employers and workers of the organisation.
The persons acting as arbitrators of the parties should be such as would induce confidence in them. It
would be open to the parties to select an arbitrator. The parties can select an arbitrator from the list or
even from outside.
4. An important question is whether those persons who would act as arbitrators be paid or not need further
discussion.
5. For the success of voluntary arbitration, recognition of trade unions by employers is needed. The
Committee acknowledges the need to intensify efforts to assure a better working of the voluntary
arrangements regarding the recognition of unions.

Voluntary arbitration in relation to its jurisdiction

The jurisdiction of the arbitrators is derived from the agreement of the parties under Section 10A when an arbitrator
is appointed by the parties. He acts beyond his jurisdiction when he decides matters not referred to him by the
parties.

In Raza Textile Labour Union v. Maharaja Shri Umaid Mills Ltd. (1958), the court quashed the decisions in three
matters. This was because the award given in those three matters was not covered by the 167 disputes that were
referred to him. Therefore, the court said that he had acted beyond his jurisdiction.

In Vaikuntam Estate v. Arbitrator, 1967, the arbitrator exceeded the terms of reference. So the Madras High Court
quashed the interim award of the arbitrator as he acted beyond his jurisdiction.

Under Section 10A, an arbitrator ceases to have jurisdiction after the expiration of the time period that was
mentioned in the agreement. The court also stated that if the parties themselves do not raise any objections against
the expiration of the time limit of the arbitrator that was mentioned in the agreement then they cannot, later on,
challenge the decision of the arbitrator under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Government intervention in voluntary arbitration

The government has no role to play in the choice of dispute settlement systems under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Though it is true, a receipt for a copy of a valid arbitration agreement is sent to the government. The government
then regulates the process of settlement of the industrial dispute by voluntary arbitration in the following ways:

● The arbitration agreement is published;

● The notification under Section 10A(3A) is issued;
● During arbitration proceedings the continuance of strikes and lockouts is prohibited;
● Arbitration award is published;
● Arbitration award is operated;
● Arbitration award is enforced.

Issuance of notification by the government

The appropriate government is empowered under Section 10A(3A), where :

1. an industrial dispute has been referred to arbitration; and

2. it is convinced that the person making the reference represents the majority of each party

to issue a notification within a term of one month with a view to providing a chance to persons who are not parties to
the arbitration agreement but are interested in the dispute to put forward their case to the arbitrator or arbitrators.

On whom voluntary arbitration awards are binding

Under Section 10A, the award or decision of the arbitrators is binding on the parties to the arbitrations unlike the
awards of industrial tribunals. But under Section 10A(3A), when a notification has been issued, the arbitration award
shall not only be binding on all parties to the industrial dispute but also on:

1. all other parties summoned to present themselves in the proceedings as parties to the dispute unless the
arbitrator is himself of the opinion that they were summoned without proper reason;
2. where a party is an employer, or his heirs, successors or assigns in the matter of the establishment to
which the dispute relates referred to in the above point;
3. all persons who were employed in the establishment or part of the establishment or a party is composed
of workmen referred to in the above points and also on persons who were present on the date of dispute
and all those persons who afterwards become employed in that establishment.

Power of the High Court over voluntary arbitration

The award of the arbitrators can be challenged in court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Indian
Constitution. Under Article 227, the High Court has the power of superintendence over all the lower courts and
tribunals within its jurisdiction. The main question was whether a high court can interfere with an award of the
arbitrator under Article 227. The Supreme Court gave a negative answer and placed Article 227 on par with Article
136. The Supreme Court stated that the High Courts were not competent to have powers of superintendence over the
voluntary arbitrators under Section 10A because arbitrators are not tribunals.

Judicial pronouncements
 1. In the case of Engineering Mazdoor Sabha v. Hind Cycles Ltd. (1963), the Supreme Court of India
observed that an arbitral tribunal set up under Section 10A, arbitration was statutory. It was held that
the decision given by an arbitrator was a quasi-judicial decision and open to judicial review by the
Supreme Court under Article 136. In the future, it will be asserted that it is open to the writ jurisdiction
of high courts under Article 226 and stated that the arbitrations are different in nature from those
adjudicated upon by private arbitrators.
2. In the case of Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. Rohtas Industries Staff Union (1976), the Apex Court further
expanded the meaning of Section 10A. The court explicitly observed that since this section had the
power to bind even the parties who are not directly involved in the agreement, it was amenable to the
jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 227, as these tribunals formed an extension of the
sovereign justice system.
3. In the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha (1980), the court held
that the amendment of 1964 to the Industrial Disputes Act extended the application of article 136 to an
award of an arbitrator under Section 10A.

The Supreme Court, through its several judgements, has opined that while the arbitration legislation might not be
applicable to the arbitration under the Act, there are some significant provisions that have to be adhered to and are
indispensable. The arbitral tribunal, while awarding, cannot exceed the strict boundaries of reference, and doing so
would render the award illegal and not binding. The reward also has to be in accordance with the existing laws of
the legislature and the Supreme Court, and any award to the contrary would also be invalid.

The information about the arbitration agreement has to be published for the benefit of all the workers, and failure to
do so would be fatal to the award. The Bombay High Court also held that the remedies under Section 10 and Section
10A are alternatives to one another. Hence, where an agreement of arbitration has been entered into by the parties,
the government cannot refer the same to any of the authorities mentioned in Section 10 of the Act.

Conclusion

Voluntary arbitration is a growing global trend as it encourages class-action arbitration as a quicker, cheaper, and
faster means of resolving disputes. It also allows the workers in industrial disputes to slightly balance the scales of
bargaining power in their favour, which are mainly biased towards the employer because of their dominant
economic position. Similarly, it will be helpful to conduct multiple and expensive disputes at the same time when
both parties mutually agree to do so. It will also be helpful for improving the arbitral infrastructure and literature in
India. Voluntary arbitration requires less time to settle disputes. Time is an important factor, and a delay in the
resolution of disputes may be detrimental to the interests of the parties. This is why voluntary arbitration is a wise
choice. This makes it especially important for the parties to have a non-adversarial mode of dispute resolution.

Voluntary arbitration is very helpful in maintaining proper relations in the industrial sector. Voluntary arbitration
can only succeed in a suitable environment if collective bargaining is encouraged. It is necessary to amend the Trade
Union Act to acknowledge trade unions. The trade unions must change their attitude towards voluntary arbitration.
A clause is needed to be inserted in the collective bargaining agreement so that in the event of any difference
between parties over the interpretation of any terms of the agreement, the dispute should be settled by voluntary
arbitration. Voluntary arbitration, as a dispute settlement mechanism, has been functioning for decades in resolving
disputes. The court has time and again given several views and decisions in several areas. Voluntary arbitration has
succeeded in resolving various issues.

An important aspect behind the choice of voluntary arbitration is that it allows the parties to the dispute to decide the
procedure and the people adjudicating it, therefore making it more likely to be acceptable. Confidentiality of
proceedings is another aspect that most industries would like to consider in order to prevent any public defamation
of their image. Voluntary arbitration is open to judicial review by the superior judiciary. In spite of these clear
benefits, voluntary arbitration has not been used as extensively as would have been expected.
Alteration of conditions of service

Introduction

Laws have multiple functions. One such vital role is that it is a middle ground between disputing parties. One such
legislation which resolves disputes between workman and employer, workman and workman, is the Industrial
Disputes Act of 1947. Apart from resolving disputes, the act safeguards workmen’s and employers’ interests during
proceedings. Chapter VII of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, titled “Miscellaneous,” provides Section 33, which
keeps a check on the employer to make changes in conditions of service, etc., during the pendency of proceedings.

When a workman initiates or continues any proceeding against the employer, or the company, the probability of the
workman being victimised is high. Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 aims to protect the workman from
victimisation. Additionally, the section ensures to terminate the pending proceedings peacefully and restores
harmony. The ban on employers is not absolute; there are certain exceptions, which are added by way of the 1956
amendment. The provisions of and amendments to the section are discussed herein.

Prohibition on Employers

Section 33(1) of the act prohibits employers to undertake certain actions during the continuation of a dispute. The
section is bifurcated into two sub-clauses, (a) and (b). Their respective provisions are as follows:

1. Not to alter terms of service

Section 33(1)(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 completely prohibits the employer’s right to terminate the
services of his employees. For workmen to seek protection under the Section, the following conditions must be
satisfied.

● There should be an industrial dispute pending before the appropriate authority.

The period between the commencement and conclusion of conciliation, adjudication, or arbitration proceedings is
the period of pending proceedings. As stated by the court in Karnal Kaithal Co-operative Transport Society v. State
of Punjab, 1958.

● The authorities with jurisdiction over industrial disputes are the Conciliation officer or Board,
Arbitrator, Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal.
● The workman should be concerned in the pending proceedings.
● The alteration of the services made by the employer shall be regarding the matter of the pending
proceeding. It shall also be prejudicial to the interest of the workman.
● Additionally, the alteration should affect changing the conditions of service. These services apply to the
workman before the commencement of such proceedings.

Meaning of alteration in the conditions of service

The definition of alteration has not been specified, but from judgments over the years, it can be deduced as what
constitutes “alteration”.
In National Coal Co. v. L.P. Dave, 1956, the industrial dispute was about paying full pay and allowance to workmen
on Independence day and Republic Day. The court held that any reduction or cut in workmen’s wages is an
alteration.

While in Lakshmi Devi Sugar Mills v. Pt. Ram Sarup, 1956, lock-out has been held to not be an alteration in the
service conditions. In the instant case, seventy-six workers went on a strike as a co-worker was dismissed. The
management sought to prevent the entry of the workers, but they violently did. Later that day, a lock-out was
declared.

2. Not to discharge or punish

Section 33(1)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, prohibits the employer from taking disciplinary action against
the workman for misconduct connected with the dispute. The workman shall be concerned in such dispute. Along
with this, the Section requires that the action proposed to be taken should be connected with discharge or
punishment by dismissal or otherwise.

This discharge should be regarding any misconduct connected with the pending dispute. In Sasa Musa Sugar Works
(P) Ltd. v. Shobrati Khan and others,1959, the appellant had served notices on forty-eight employees as they
participated in go-slow (deliberately delaying the work). The Tribunal disallowed the application of dismissal. But
the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and granted the dismissal of workers as there was sufficient evidence of
misconduct. The court held that the Tribunal must accord permission under Section 33 when it is satisfied with the
evidence of misconduct of the workmen.

But where there is express written permission from the authority before whom the proceeding is pending, the
employer has the power to discharge or punish the workman. The employer is empowered to suspend the concerned
workman based on the enquiry’s verdict without applying for permission. Thus, the restrictions imposed on the
employer are not absolute.

In East India Coal Co. v. P.R. Mukherjee, 1959, there were two applications. The Tribunal rejected one of them and
justified the discharge order, which could become a subject matter for future disputes. Thus, it was held that when
permission of an Industrial Tribunal is asked for the discharge of the workmen under Section 33, the only duty of the
Tribunal is to accord the permission or withhold it.

While carrying out disciplinary action against the workman, a fair domestic enquiry is required.

Domestic enquiry

The guidelines for carrying out a domestic enquiry should adhere to the principle of natural justice as there is no
statutory provision governing this subject matter. Before charging a workman with disciplinary action, the employer
is required to hold a domestic enquiry. This enquiry includes allowing the employee to represent their case
adequately.

In Martin Burn Ltd. v. R.N. Banerjee, 1957, the respondent was under the appellant’s employment; over time, his
work became unsatisfactory, an enquiry into his work service was held, and he was held unsuitable to work. An
application was filed for discharge but was refused by the Tribunal as no prima facie case. The Supreme Court
upheld the judgment and held that prima facie guilt is established after holding a fair domestic enquiry following the
principle of natural justice.
Circumstances in which the Employer is allowed to alter, discharge or punish

Section 33(2) deals with alteration in the conditions of service and discharge or dismissal of a workman who is
connected to a pending dispute, but such action is taken in regard to a matter not connected to the pending dispute.
Sub-section 2 contains two sub-clauses.

Section 33(2)(a) states that the employer can alter the services applicable to the workman before the commencement
of proceedings.

While Section 33(2)(b) states that the employer can for the misconduct of the workman discharge or punish by way
of dismissal or otherwise. the matter certainly shall not be connected to the pending dispute.

In order to exercise the powers of discharge or dismissal, the proviso to Section 33(2)(b) requires two conditions to
be fulfilled. If the requirements are not satisfied, the management’s application is liable to be dismissed. In the case
of Podar Mills Ltd. v. Bhagwan Singh and Anr.,1974, the appellant’s application for approval of dismissal was
refused by the Tribunal on grounds for delay in making an application of approval; the Supreme Court upheld the
judgment. The conditions are

1. The concerned workmen should be paid wages for one month. These one-month wages include all prior
wages plus the wages for the next month. The court viewed in Prabhakar H. Manjare v. Indian
Telephone Industries Ltd., 1998, where the application of approval was denied and held illegal as one
month’s back wages were not paid. Concludingly, the appellant’s appeal was granted, restoring his
services, and he was entitled to all consequential benefits.
2. The employer must make an application before the appropriate authority for approval of the action
taken by the employer.

Based on the proviso to Section 33(2)(b), it contemplates

1. dismissal or discharge,
2. the payment of wages, and
3. making an application for approval.

Further, the principles to be considered by the Tribunal before granting or refusing approval under Section 33(2)(b)
are to observe:

1. Whether standing orders justify orders of dismissal,

2. Whether the enquiry has been held as prescribed by Standing Orders, and
3. Whether the conditions laid down in the proviso of Section 33(b) are fulfilled.

In G.K. Sengupta v. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd.,1994, the appellant was an employee who was charged for
showcasing indecent behaviour. The approval application sent to Maharashtra Tribunal was accepted. This judgment
was challenged in the Bombay High Court as the Tribunal, without proceeding with the hearing of the application
granted it.

The court held that before granting or refusing approval under Section 33(2)(b), the Tribunal must give a reasonable
opportunity to hear the parties concerned.
Regarding the relationship between the employer and workman at the time of proceedings under Section 33. Only
the de facto relationship ends when an order to discharge or dismissal is passed, but the de jure relationship ends
only when the Tribunal accords approval.

In S.Ganapaty and Ors. v. Air India and Anr., 1993, where the employees were dismissed due to disciplinary action.
The one-month wage was given after the deduction of tax, the grounds of the appeal. As the de jure relationship is
still present, the content and character of wage would remain the same. Thus, the appeal was dismissed.

What is a Protected Workman

Section 33(3) was inserted in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by way of amending the Act in 1956. With this
section’s help, a new class of “protected workmen” was developed.

Explanation to Section 33(3) defines a protected workman as any workman who is a member of the executive or
other office bearer of a registered trade union connected to the establishment.

Union of India v. Rajasthan Annushakti Karamchari Union Rawatbhata, 1976, defines a protected workman as
someone who enjoys immunity against being dismissed or discharged during adjudication or conciliation
proceedings relating to an industrial dispute pending between the workmen and the employer. The case deals with
whether the time limit mentioned in Rule 61 is mandatory or directory. The court held that it was mandatory.

Provisions and limitations relating to Protected Workmen

A workman is recognised as a protected workman where the Rule 61 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules is
applicable.

Rule 61 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules deals with the recognition and distribution of protected workmen.
It contains four sub-rules, them being

1. Every registered trade union must communicate the names and addresses of office bearers to the
employer for the recognition of a protected workman by 30th April of every year.
2. It is the duty of the employer to declare the list of protected workmen within 15 days of receiving the
letter from the union.

In P.H. Kalyani v. Air France, Calcutta, 1963, the appellant had challenged his dismissal, which was denied. The
court held that the employer must show positive action by sending his confirmation of the recognised protected
workmen before the worker can claim to be a protected workman.

In Divisional Controller MSRTC v. Conciliation Officer Akola and Anr,1993, the court held that where the union
sends only one name, such a workman is bound to accept the privilege. In the case, declaring respondent No.2 as a
protected workman was challenged. The appellant stated that this was impossible as no list regarding the number of
workmen was sent. The application contained only one name, which was accepted.

3. Where any dispute arises between the employer and registered trade union related to the matter of
recognition of protected workmen, the dispute is referred to Regional Labour Commissioner or
Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central).
 4. The rule prescribes the number of workmen to be recognised as protected workmen. Section 33(4) of
the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 provides provisions for the same. It states that one percent of the total
number of workmen employed is subject to a minimum of five and a maximum of one hundred.

The employer can refuse to recognise a protected workman if the case is within the statutory grounds of Section
33(4). The court held this in R Balasubramanian and Ors. v. Caebarandum Universal Ltd, 1975, where a petition
was filed stating that there was no infringement to Section 33(3) of the Act because the petitioners were not proven
to be protected workmen at the time of the dismissal order. The Gujarat High Court allowed the petition.

Finally, this protection is available to every registered trade union related to the establishment. The maximum
number of protected workmen varies.

Approval of any action under sub-section (2) taken by the employer

The provisions for the approval of actions taken by the employer under sub-section (2) are provided under Section
33(5) of the act. Sub-section (5) states that the concerned authority, without any delay, shall hear and pass the
application. This process shall be concluded within three months from the date of receipt of the application; such
was substituted by Act 46 of 1982.

Further, the Act 46 of 1982 added a proviso to the sub-section that if the authority deems it necessary, it may extend
the period further in writing.

Landmark Cases

Lord Krishan Textile Mills v. Its Workmen, 1961

In Lord Krishan Textile Mills v. Its Workmen, 1961, two officers were assaulted by workmen. Upon domestic
enquiry per standing orders, the workmen were found guilty and consequently dismissed from employment. As a
dispute of bonus payment was pending before the Tribunal, the appellant applied for dismissal. The Tribunal denied
the approval, an appeal against the order was made in the Supreme Court, and the same was set aside.

The case is a landmark case of Section 33 as it laid down principles that showcased clarity. Firstly, the Supreme
Court illustrated the distinction between Section 33(1) and Section 33(2) concerning the scope of enquiry.

Section 33(1) Section 33(2)

Permission obtaining express permission obtaining express permission is not a necessity but must
is necessary. fulfill the specified conditions.

Jurisdiction the jurisdiction of the authority permission not being a necessity, the jurisdiction is narrow.
to grant or withhold Also, under Section 33(2)(a), no approval is required, and
permission is broad. the right of the employer remains unaffected by the ban.
The court pronounced that the appropriate authority should be actively aware that there are two classes of cases, and
the separating line between the two sub-sections is providing express permission in only approval in another.

Secondly, the court observed that, even though express permission in writing is not required in cases under Section
33(2)(b), there should be no time lag between the action taken by the employer and the order passed by the
authority.

Next, the court also upheld the proviso to sub-section (2) and held that satisfying those conditions is required before
dismissing a workman.

Strawbroad Manufacturing Co. v. Gobind, 1962

In this case, the respondent was an employee who did not comply with officers’ orders repeatedly. He was
suspended based on the enquiry. Further, the appellant dismissed the respondent. The employer sent applications for
approval. The approval was refused because the application was made after dismissal. Then, the appellant appealed
to the apex court.

The Supreme Court in Strawbroad Manufacturing Co. v. Gobind, 1962, answered whether the application for
approval should be made before or after the employer’s discharge or dismissal action.

The court, upon consideration of three things under the proviso of Section 33(2)(b), held that a dismissal order could
be passed and an application under Section 33(2)(b) could be taken thereafter. The court held that such an action is
an inchoate condition. But dismissal, payment of one month’s wages and making an application should take place
simultaneously and be part of the same transaction.

Further, if the order of approval is not granted under the section, the order of dismissal becomes ineffective from the
date it was passed. Thus, the employee would be deemed as never to be dismissed or discharged and entitled to
wages from the date of dismissal to the date of disapproval.

Conclusion

The procedure for reaching the final verdict is long. Thus, there are numerous pending proceedings; new
disagreements could arise. Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 governs such situations between
employers and employees. It ensures to avoid victimisation of employees and avoids an absolute ban on the
employer’s powers. Instead, the section does not take away any existing management rights. It only requires them to
submit its action for scrutiny.

Management rights of action during pendency of proceedings

Section 33 of Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Conditions of service, etc., to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of proceedings
It provides that during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a conciliation officer no employer shall
prejudice the workmen concerned in such dispute and also foe any misconduct connected with the dispute, discharge
or punish, whether by dismissal or otherwise. It also provides that the employer in case of pendency of a suit instead
of any standing orders applicable or reference to any contract, either express or implied may alter regarding any
matter not involved in the dispute and may also dismiss the employee in case of any misconduct not relating to the
dispute. It provides that in such scenario where the employee is being dismissed then he shall be paid wages for one
month and appropriate application shall be made by the employee to the authority before which the proceeding is
pending. It further provides that action as mentioned shall not be taken against the protected workman, and such
protected workman as recognized shall be one per cent of the total number of workmen employed therein subject to
a minimum number of five protected workman and a maximum number of one hundred protected workmen.

Illustration
Due to an ongoing dispute between the employer and the employee, such employee shall not be punished for any
kind of misconduct connected with the dispute be discharged or punished through dismissal or any such alternatives.

Case Law
INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LTD. V. PRABHAKAR H. MANYARE, 2003 LLR 68.

It laid down that the conditions contained in the proviso to section 33(2)(b) are mandatory and their non-compliance
would render the order of discharge or dismissal void or inoperative. If a Tribunal refuses to grant approval sought
for under section 33(2)(b) of the Act, the effect of it shall be that the order of discharge or dismissal had never been
passed and consequently the workman would be deemed to have continued in service entitling him to the benefits
available. It is also made clear that not making an application under section 33(2)(b) seeking approval or
withdrawing an application once made before any order is made thereon, is a clear case of contravention of the
proviso to section 33(2)(b) of the Act.

Section 33A of Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Special provision for adjudication as to whether conditions of service, etc., changed during a period of proceeding
It provides that in case of any contravention of the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of the proceedings
any employee aggrieved by such contravention may make a complaint in writing to such conciliation officer or such
arbitrator, labour court or tribunal. It provides that upon receipt of any complaint such shall be dealt as if it were a
dispute referred to or pending before it, and shall accordingly submit his or its reward to the appropriate
Government.

Illustration
any employee aggrieved due to any contravention of the provisions as laid down under section 33 may make a
complaint to the appropriate forum as has been provided.

Case Law
MANAGEMENT OF DAINIK NAVEEN DUNIYA V. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, (1991) 63 FLR 9
(MP).

It provided that the conditions laid down in section 33A are preliminary and collateral upon which jurisdiction of the
Industrial Tribunal depends.

Section 33B of Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Power to transfer certain proceedings

It provides that the appropriate Government may by order in writing and for any reasons stated therein may
withdraw any proceedings under this act and may transfer such case to any other Labour Court, Tribunal or National
Tribunal, where such cases may either proceed de novo or from the stage at which it was so transferred. furthermore,
it provides that any Tribunal or National Tribunal may be authorised by the appropriate government to transfer any
proceeding to any one of the Labour Courts specified for disposal by the appropriate authority.
Illustration
The appropriate Government may transfer the case from the labour court situated in any district to some other
district.

Case Law
BENNETT COLEMAN & CO. LTD. V. STATE OF PUNJAB, (1992) 64 FLR 449 (P&H).

The Labour Court has no jurisdiction Suo motu to transfer the proceedings to any other court.

Section 33C of Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Recovery of money due from an employer

It provides that in case the workman is owed some money by the employer under a settlement or an award then in
such case the employee shall make an application to the appropriate Government either by himself or any person
authorised by him or in case of his death, the assignee or heirs. In such case, if the appropriate Government is
satisfied that such amount is due by the employer to the employee, then it may issue such direction of recovery of
such money to the Collector in the same way as to recover the amount due in case of land arrear. Further, such
application shall be filed within 1 year from the date on which the money becomes due and may even be filed later
subject to the satisfaction of the appropriate Government. It provides that to compute the money value of a benefit,
the Labour Court as may deem fit shall appoint a Commissioner who shall submit a report instead of the situation
and accordingly the Labour Court shall determine the amount after considering the report of the Commissioner
along with considering other circumstances of the case.

Illustration
A workman is owed some money by the employer concerning an award granted. In this scenario, the workman shall
file an application to the appropriate Government for the recovery of the amount due.

Case Law
NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION (SOUTH MAHARASHTRA) LTD. V. VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL, (2002) IV
LLJ (SUPP) BOM 909.

It was observed that it was for the employers to have placed before the Labour Court the documentary evidence to
show what was the total pay packet of the employees and what were the components of such pay packets of all
employees. In the absence of such material and evidence, an order of Labour Court is just, fair and correct as per
law.

Unfair labour practices:

Workers are the most important asset for the economic growth and development of every country. They contribute
to the production and manufacturing of goods and services, and in exchange, they receive wages as remuneration.
An employer and employee together contribute to gaining revenue and profit, but here the question arises, is it so
simple to work peacefully and enjoy the benefits? No, in every organisation, whether public or private, several
disputes arise between the employer and employee, either about fair wages, working hours, or trade union demands.
To ensure and prevent such disputes and for the welfare of labourers or workmen and their employers, the Industrial
Disputes Act of 1947 came into force. The main objectives of the Act are to promote peace and welfare, create
amicable relations between employers and labourers, settle industrial disputes, and prevent illegal strikes or unfair
trade practices.

Practices that can be considered unfair labour practices

Before the enactment of labour legislation, workmen and labourers were dominated by employers, but gradually
labour welfare provisions were introduced, such as the Trade Union Act of 1926, the Factories Act of 1948, and the
Minimum Wages Act of 1948, which gave recognition to the rights of labourers and protected them from
exploitation and unfair labour practices.

In simple terms, unfair labour practices are deceitful practices by either employers or labourers to obtain profits that
are prohibited by the statutes. Unfair labour practices are defined under the Fifth Schedule, Section 2(ra) of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, which was added after the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 1982. The Fifth
Schedule of the Act listed certain practices which amount to unfair labour practices, and Sections 25-T and 25-U
laid down the provisions for the same.

Section 25-T deals with prohibited unfair labour practices. It states that an employer or worker can not engage in
such activities which are against the welfare and peace of the employers and labourers as well. This Section also
includes registering and unregistering trade unions. Section 25-U provides a penalty of imprisonment, fine, or both
for unfair trade practices.

Unfair labour practices by the employer

As per the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, unfair labour practices can be done by employers and trade unions as well.
The Fifth Schedule has mentioned the activities which amount to unfair labour practices. The practices which are
prohibited by employers are the following:

1. The employer can not prohibit their employees from joining or establishing any trade union or can not
interfere in their work.
2. If an employee joins a union, the employer is not permitted to harass or control them.
3. The employer can not bully an employee for being a part of legal lock-outs or strikes.
4. Imposing any penalty or giving threats to dismiss them from the services.
5. No discrimination or partiality for their workmen’s trade union.
6. Create workmen’s trade unions supported by employers.
7. Refuse to promote a worker because they supported unions.
8. Promoting ineligible workers instead of eligible workers.
9. Firing any employee on false allegations, and little technical mistakes made by the workers.
10. Assigning work to contractors instead of workmen.
11. Maliciously transferring workers.
12. Appointing contract workers to cut down on the wages and compensation that permanent workers
must receive.
13. Appointment of new workmen when a legal strike is going on by the existing workmen.
14. Refusing collective bargaining with trade unions.
15. Not awarding the workmen for their work.
16. Creating violence among the workmen.
17. Discriminating against the employee who reported any false or illegal practice, discrimination, or
any other practice against
18. Paying fewer wages concerning the work assigned to workmen.
19. Demotion of the workmen because they took part in trade union activities.
20. Dismissing the workers who are members of any trade union.

Unfair labour practices by Trade Unions

Unfair labour practices are not only done by employers, trade unions also sometimes contribute to unfair labour
practices. The Fifth Schedule of the Industrial Dispute Act mentions the following practices which are prohibited for
trade unions:

1. Promoting and supporting illegal strikes.

2. Threatening the workers to join trade unions.
3. Prohibiting any worker from entering the workplace who is not participating in illegal strikes.
4. Using criminal force against workers who are not participating in strikes or lockouts that are not
permitted as per the provisions of the legislation.
5. Not aiming for workers’ welfare.
6. Refusing collective bargaining as representatives of workmen.
7. Entering the residence of the employers and damaging their personal property.
8. Encourage the workers to demolish the industrial assets.
9. Imposing illegal strikes such as going slow, or gherao(surrounding the employers to fulfil the demands
of the workers).
10. Threatening or harassing the workers who are going to work.

State legislations on unfair labour practices

In India, most of the labour legislations are enacted by the Central Government but apart from this, states have also
introduced legislation that governs labour laws. Few state labour laws are :

Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946

This Act came into force in April 1946 and was applied to the whole of Maharashtra. It tries to govern the
provisions and resolve conflicts between an employer and their employees. It regulates employer-employee
relationships, provides for the resolution of labour disputes, and serves a few other purposes. It is necessary to make
provisions for the regulation of employer-employee relationships in certain situations, to merge and update the
legislation governing the resolution of labour disputes, as well as to make provisions for many other objectives.

The Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960

This Act came into being in 1960. This Act states that an employer can not penalise any of his employees for
participating in any trade union activities like strikes or lock-outs which are legal. The Act makes provisions for the
settlement of industrial disputes and regulates the relations of employers and their workers in certain matters.

The Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971

This Act was passed in 1971 and came into force in September 1975. It was approved by the Indian government to
regulate some businesses there to achieve the desired level of empathy between employees and employers. The
objectives of this Act are to give recognition to-

● The trade unions

● Promote collective bargaining, and
● Prevent unfair labour practices.
Legislation to prevent and punish unfair labour practices

The Industrial Dispute Act, of 1947 has the provision for the penalty for unfair labour practices under Section 25-U.
Any employer or organisation who imposes such practices which are prohibited as per the Fifth Schedule of the Act
shall be punished and fined as mentioned in the Section, i.e., six months’ imprisonment or a fine of one thousand
rupees or both.

How to settle industrial disputes

Industrial disputes are conflicts between an employer and their workers or labourers and trade unions. The causes
can be unfair wages, long working hours, unfair labour practices, improper government machinery, etc. In our
country, the litigation process is very time-consuming and expensive. Rather than going to the courts to settle
disputes, it is better to settle the dispute via alternative mechanisms. Industrial disputes can be settled through
alternative mechanisms as well, which are as follows:

Collective bargaining or negotiation

It is an amicable way to settle the dispute. The parties mutually settle the dispute without the interference of the third
party. The settlement of disputes through the collective bargaining process is the most acceptable procedure.

Collective bargaining means that all employees are represented in negotiations and contacts with management by the
union, which has been elected as the authorised agent of the worker. The practice of collective bargaining is
beneficial to both employees and employers. This ensures both the employees’ rights and the corporation’s essential
interests are protected. From three different angles, collective bargaining has been analysed, i.e., as a method of
social transformation; as a peace agreement between the parties engaged in combat; and as a framework for
industrial law.

In the case of Karol Leather Karamchari Sangathan v. Liberty Footwear (1989), the Supreme Court stated that
collective bargaining is the process to resolve disputes between employees and employers in an amicable manner.

Conciliation

Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. Parties can settle their disputes outside of court with the
assistance of the conciliator. A conciliator is a neutral party in a dispute who assists the party in reaching a mutual
decision. The conciliation process provides quicker and cheaper dispute resolution compared to regular court
proceedings. A successful conciliation helps to build a strong relationship among the parties as this resolution
safeguards the interests of both parties.

Section 4 and Section 5 of the Act provide provisions to appoint a conciliation officer to settle the industrial dispute.
A conciliation officer is the third party who tries to settle the dispute in an amicable way within the board.

Voluntary arbitration

Section 10-A of the Act states that parties can enter into an arbitration agreement to settle disputes. Arbitration is the
process of settling disputes outside of court with the assistance of a third party who is known as an arbitrator. The
arbitrator imposes an award that is binding on the parties.
In the case of Workmen Of Cement Industry v. Union Of India (1987), it was observed that voluntary arbitration is
the mechanism to settle industrial disputes, which minimises industrial strikes and utilises the workers for the
development of the economy of the country.

Adjudication

When disputes are not settled through the above-mentioned methods, they are referred to statutory bodies for
settlement. Sections 7, 7-A, and 7-B of the Industrial Disputes Act provide the provisions for the establishment of a
Labour Court, Industrial Tribunal, and Labour Tribunal.

Authorities under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 for dispute settlement

The Act came into force for labour welfare and aims to investigate, settle industrial disputes and prevent unfair
labour practices. The following is the settlement machinery provided by the Act:

Work committees (Section 3)

The constitution of work committees is mentioned under Section 3 of the Act. It consists of the representatives of
both the disputing parties. It aims to settle disputes and create an amicable environment for the workers. When 100
or more workers are currently engaged or have been employed on any given working day over the previous 12
months, the competent government may, by general or special order, require the employer to form a works
committee under the authorised procedures. The representatives of the establishment’s employers and employees
will make up the work committee. The work committee under Section 3(2) of the Act has to maintain an amicable
relationship between an employer and workmen, work for the interests of both employers and workmen, and take
necessary steps to avoid industrial disputes.

Conciliation (Section 4)

It is the procedure to settle the dispute with the help of a third party known as a conciliation officer. The appropriate
government appoints a person who is deemed fit for the role of conciliation officer as per the provisions of Section 4
of the Act. A conciliation officer may be appointed either temporary or permanent for any specific area or industry.
A conciliation officer has the authority to enter into any premises to inquire about any industrial dispute, promoting
industrial peace. It is an informal proceeding where the parties have the flexibility to decide the venue, time, and
structure to resolve their disputes.

Conciliation Board (Section 5)

The appropriate government can appoint a board of conciliation through official notification in a gazette. The board
consists of the chairman and two or four members. There must be equal members on the board. When a dispute
arises, the board is appointed to settle it amicably. Section 13 of the Act provides the duties of the board. It can
investigate the matter without any delay and settle the dispute fairly and amicably. When the dispute is settled, the
board will send the report with the memorandum of settlement to the government; whereas, if the dispute is not
settled, the board will send a report stating the causes and recommendations for the disputes.

Court of Inquiry (Section 6)

According to Section 6 of the Act, the government may appoint a court of inquiry by its official notification to
enquire into the matter and make a report on the inquiry within six months. It is borrowed from the British Industrial
Courts Act, 1919. It consists of one or more independent persons. There can be one chairman. The main function of
the Court of Inquiry is to investigate the matter and make a report on the dispute within six months from the date of
the commencement of the inquiry.

Labour Court (Section 7)

The appropriate government can constitute a labour court after being notified in its official gazette. A presiding
officer is appointed by the government. A person who is appointed as the presiding officer must have at least one of
the following qualifications:

1. High Court judge;

2. District or Additional District Judge for a minimum of three years;
3. A person who is under the employment of judicial office for at least seven years;
4. Any presiding officer under the State Act for a duration of a minimum of five years.
5. Industrial Tribunal (Section 7-A(1))

One or more industrial tribunals are settled by the government to settle matters about industrial disputes. The
appropriate government, by its official notification, may constitute one or more industrial tribunals for the settlement
of the industrial dispute. It can be constituted for a specific time or for any specific case. It is also headed by the
presiding officer.

National Tribunal (Section 7-B(1))

A national tribunal only entertains matters relating to national importance or if the industry is situated in different
states. The Central Government constitutes one or more National Tribunals which have a composition of one
presiding officer who must be a High Court judge.

Landmark judgments

S.G. Chemical and Dyes Trading Employees’ Union v. S.G. Chemicals and Dyes Trading Limited and Another,
1986

In this case, the trade union filed a complaint against the company under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition
Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The company had given notice that it would
close its office located at Churchgate, Bombay. It sent the notice to the Secretary of Maharashtra Industries and
Labour Department, Bombay. The union raised a complaint against the notice as eighty-four employees had not
received their wages.

The Labour Court allowed this complaint as it found that the closure of the company was illegal and the termination
of the services of the employees was an unfair labour practice. The company was ordered to compensate its
employees. The workmen whose services were terminated due to illegal closure will continue their services in the
company and are entitled to get their full salary and other benefits.

Regional Manager, SBI v. Mahatma Mishra, 2006

The respondent was temporarily appointed in 1982 for 88 days, but his services were terminated before the tenure.
In this case, the Labour Court found that it came under the ambit of unfair labour practice as the defendant was
appointed on May 3, 1982, and terminated on September 3, 1982. Considering that he was hired on May 3, 1982,
and that his employment was terminated on September 3, 1982, the Labour Court held that his termination was not
casual, but rather one of a permanent nature. In addition, it was determined that the management had reported unfair
labour practices.

The Labour Court also found that the respondent did not receive any written notice for the termination of his
services; hence it was considered an illegal act under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Miscellaneous provisions of code

● This Bill amends The Labour Laws (Exemption from Furnishing Returns and Maintaining Registers by
Certain Establishments) Act, 1988 and certain other labour laws.
● The Bill limits the application of the Act to establishments with 500 or fewer employees, unless otherwise
notified by the central government.
● The Bill changes the definition of “small establishment” to include establishments with less than 10
employees and omits the concept of “very small establishments.”
● The principal Act exempts establishments with under 20 employees from furnishing returns and
maintaining registers. The Bill expands this exemption to include establishments with up to 500 employees
provided that they furnish an annual return and maintain a register or persons and wage roll in simple forms
as provided in the Bill.
● The Bill increases the penalty for employers who fail to comply with the provisions of the Act from Rs
5,000 to Rs 10,000 or imprisonment of up to 3 months, or both. The Bill also grants the central government
the power to amend any schedule by notification in the official gazette, and laid before each house of
Parliament while in session.
● The Bill grants the appropriate government authority to exempt any establishment from the maintenance of
furnishing of any register provided they are satisfied with an alternative method for maintaining a registry.
● The Bill amends 15 related labour laws listed in the principal Act. The Bill increases the amounts of fines
for various penalties in each Act as well as the term of imprisonment for various offences.
● This Bill amends The Labour Laws (Exemption from Furnishing Returns and Maintaining Registers by
Certain Establishments) Act, 1988 and certain other labour laws.
● The Bill limits the application of the Act to establishments with 500 or fewer employees, unless otherwise
notified by the central government.
● The Bill changes the definition of “small establishment” to include establishments with less than 10
employees and omits the concept of “very small establishments.”
● The principal Act exempts establishments with under 20 employees from furnishing returns and
maintaining registers. The Bill expands this exemption to include establishments with up to 500 employees
provided that they furnish an annual return and maintain a register or persons and wage roll in simple forms
as provided in the Bill.
● The Bill increases the penalty for employers who fail to comply with the provisions of the Act from Rs
5,000 to Rs 10,000 or imprisonment of up to 3 months, or both. The Bill also grants the central government
the power to amend any schedule by notification in the official gazette, and laid before each house of
Parliament while in session.
● The Bill grants the appropriate government authority to exempt any establishment from the maintenance of
furnishing of any register provided they are satisfied with an alternative method for maintaining a registry.
● The Bill amends 15 related labour laws listed in the principal Act. The Bill increases the amounts of fines
for various penalties in each Act as well as the term of imprisonment for various offences.
● This Bill amends The Labour Laws (Exemption from Furnishing Returns and Maintaining Registers by
Certain Establishments) Act, 1988 and certain other labour laws.
● The Bill limits the application of the Act to establishments with 500 or fewer employees, unless otherwise
notified by the central government.
 ● The Bill changes the definition of “small establishment” to include establishments with less than 10
employees and omits the concept of “very small establishments.”
● The principal Act exempts establishments with under 20 employees from furnishing returns and
maintaining registers. The Bill expands this exemption to include establishments with up to 500 employees
provided that they furnish an annual return and maintain a register or persons and wage roll in simple forms
as provided in the Bill.
● The Bill increases the penalty for employers who fail to comply with the provisions of the Act from Rs
5,000 to Rs 10,000 or imprisonment of up to 3 months, or both. The Bill also grants the central government
the power to amend any schedule by notification in the official gazette, and laid before each house of
Parliament while in session.
● The Bill grants the appropriate government authority to exempt any establishment from the maintenance of
furnishing of any register provided they are satisfied with an alternative method for maintaining a registry.
● The Bill amends 15 related labour laws listed in the principal Act. The Bill increases the amounts of fines
for various penalties in each Act as well as the term of imprisonment for various offences.

Labour laws are a set of compliances that set the tone for the treatment of the labour force in the workplace. Labour
is the greatest asset for an organisation and to ensure that their rights are protected and to safeguard them against any
exploitation, labour laws are enforced. It regulates the companies, workers, and trade unions. Non-compliance with
the laws can lead to punitive action towards the organisation.

Labour Laws are imposed by the State as well as the Central Government. The labour law compliances are not just
restricted to filing returns, but these records serve as evidence for the compliance of the laws and must be produced
to the authorities in case of any discrepancies. There are laws that are enforceable only for certain work
environments. And there are some laws that are enforceable to all organisations.

The major acts included in the industrial law compliance rules are:

Act Applicable to Purpose Other Comments

Building and It is applicable in The purpose of the Act This act does not apply to
Other organisations where 10 or is to collect cess from building and construction sites
Construction more workers are the construction work where the Factories Act, 1948,
Workers Act, employed directly by the and use it for the welfare or Mines Act, 1952 applies.
1996 contractor in a of the workers on the
construction site. site.

Contract Labour -If the organisation has 20 The purpose is to control It does not apply to
Act, 1970 or more workers the working conditions workplaces where the nature
employed in the past 12 of contract labour of work is casual.
months as contract labour

-To every contractor who

has employed 20 or more
than 20 workers in the
past 12 months
Only an organisation
registered under this Act can
contract labour.
 Minimum Wages -It applies to entire India -To give minimum It does not apply to any
Act, 1948 wages to the workers in employees in any undertaking
the organized sector owned by the Central
Government or of the federal
railway, except with the
-It applies to any consent of the Central
employment if it has Government.
employed 1000 -To empower the
employees in the government to take steps
respective state for fixing minimum
wages and to revise
wages within 5 years.

The list of labour laws in India are as follows:

● Trade Unions Act, 1926

● Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
● Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
● Payment of Wages Act, 1936
● Payment of Bonus Act, 1965
● Working Journalists (Fixation of Rates of Wages) Act, 1958
● Factories Act, 1948
● Plantations Labor Act, 1951
● Mines Act, 1952
● Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976
● Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Services) and Miscellaneous
Provisions Act, 1955
● Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979
● Dock Workers (Safety, Health and Welfare) Act, 1986
● Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service)
Act, 1996
● Cine-workers and Cinema Theatre Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1981
● Dangerous Machines (Regulation) Act, 1983
● Merchant Shipping Act, 1958
 ● Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961
● Beedi and Cigar Workers (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966
● Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
● Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005
● Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948
● Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) (Inapplicability to Major Ports) Act, 1997
● Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993
● Maternity Benefit Act, 1961
● Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
● Bonded Labor System (Abolition) Act, 1976
● Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986
● The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013
● Apprentices Act, 1961
● Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959
● Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923
● Employees State Insurance Act, 1948
● Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952
● Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972
● Employer’s Liability Act, 1938
● Fatal Accidents Act, 1855
● Limestone and Dolomite Labor Welfare Fund Act, 1972
● Mica Mines Labor Welfare Fund Act, 1946
● Iron Ore Mines, Manganese Ore Mines, and Chrome Ore Mines Labor Welfare (Cess) Act, 1976
● Iron Ore Mines, Manganese Ore Mines, and Chrome Ore Mines Labor Welfare Fund Act, 1976
● Personal Injuries (Compensation Insurance) Act, 1963
● Personal Injuries (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1962
● Unorganized Workers Social Security Act, 2008
● Beedi Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1976
● Beedi Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1976
● Cine Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1981
● Cine Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981

As it is evident every law serves a certain purpose and hence all labour laws are employment-based and some are
establishments based.
In the event of non-compliance, an organisation will be subject to fines, penalties, lawsuit, loss of credibility, loss of
contract, and maybe even closure of the business.

The Code on Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions (OSHW), 2020, has been introduced by the
Labour and Employment Ministry and has proposed one license, one registration, and one return for establishments
for Indian companies.

The Proposed bill suggests consolidating 13 Labour laws easing out the registration and compliance process for
organisations. The Rajya Sabha in September, 2020 passed the bill and 29 labour laws are consolidated in four
labour codes of Industrial Relations Code 2020, Code on Occupational Safety, Health & Working Conditions Code
2020, Social Security Code 2020 and Wage Code 2020.

UNIT-4:

Concept and nature of standing orders:

The Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act, 1946 (hereby referred to as ‘IESO’) precisely defines the
conditions of employment under an employer to both the employer and the workmen. Before the IESO Act was
passed, there was a lack of order and clarity regarding the terms of employment by an employer. The workmen at
that time were hired on a contractual basis individually, and in most cases these contracts were either express or
implied, thus often leading to a misunderstanding of expectations between the employer and the workmen.

In many cases, these terms and conditions of hiring were ambiguous and led to friction between the workmen and
the management. The lack of rules for securing permanency of the job, fair deal and disciplinary action on petty
matters was a worrying problem for industrial workmen. There was no provision against abrupt dismissal or
wrongful termination. The workmen had no safeguards against any disciplinary actions that the employers took for
they didn’t have any guidelines or rules protecting their interest. Even in large industries, if there was a standing
order, there was no particular guidelines that it had to follow or any legislation governing the enforcement of the
same.

With the concept of Trade Unionism coming into play, the State and the Tripartite Labour Conference became the
voice of the workmen and helped pass the Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act in 1946 to ensure clear and
well-defined employment conditions or standing orders that helped establish smoother working relations between
industrial workmen and employers.

The objective of the IESO Act is to regulate the conditions of recruitment, discharge, disciplinary action, holidays,
classification of workers, mechanism of wage rates, attendance issues, etc.

Anything that requires ‘employers in industrial establishments formally to define conditions of employment under
them’ falls within the scope of the IESO Act.

The Act makes it binding for employers to ‘define with sufficient precision the conditions of employment and to
make those conditions known to the workmen.

The IESO Act helped introduce a uniformity or terms and conditions of employment in respect of workmen
belonging to the same category and discharging the same or similar work in an industrial establishment. Overall, the
IESO Act helped bring regulation and a sense of order amongst the workmen and the employers.

This Act requires the employers to define the conditions of service in their establishments and to put them in writing
and then get them certified by the Certifying Officer to avoid any unnecessary industrial disputes in the future
between the employers and the workmen. The standing orders of the said industrial establishment must conform to
the model standing orders but not necessarily consist only of the model standing order. If the establishment wishes
to add to the standing orders, then they can do so, provided the draft of the same gets approved by the Certifying
Officer.

In the case of Avery India Ltd. v. Second Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal it was held that the provisions as to the
age of retirement in the standing orders of an establishment would apply to all the employees irrespective of whether
or not they were part of the establishment where they work prior to or subsequent to the standing orders coming into
force, even though there was no such provision for the age of retirement in the past.

Standing Orders

The term ‘Standing Orders’ refers to the rules relating to the matters defined in the Schedule of the IESO Act. These
matters should be according to the Schedule, provided in Standing Orders under this Act as follows:

● Classifications of workmen, e.g., temporary, permanent, apprentice, probationers, etc.

● Manner of intimating to workmen periods and hours of work, holidays, paydays and wage rates.
● Shift working.
● Attendance and late coming.
● Conditions of procedure in applying for and the authority which may grant leave and holidays.
● The requirement to enter premises by certain gates and liability to search.
● Closing and reopening of sections of the industrial establishment, and temporary stoppages of work and
the rights and liabilities of the employer and workmen arising therefrom.
● Termination of employment and the notice thereof to be given by employer and workmen.
● Suspension or dismissal for misconduct, and acts or omissions which constitute misconduct.
● Means of redress for workmen against unfair treatment or wrongful executions by the employer or his
agents or servants.
● Any other matter which may be prescribed.

It shall be obligatory upon the employer to make provision in the Standing Orders in respect of any matter provided
in the Schedule of the Act. Once a provision is made it can be modified only in accordance with the provision of
Section 10(2) of the Act.

Nature of Standing Orders

Though the legal nature of Standing Orders is mostly considered to be statutory in nature and the same has been
reinforced in several judgements by the Apex Court, there have been several arguments debating the claim. The
nature of Standing Orders has been considered as contractual at times, and an ‘award’ at others. Meanwhile, the
argument that the nature of Standing Order is ambiguous and inconclusive seems to stand corrected as it fails to be
put in one category without solid arguments against the claim of its nature as statutory, contractual or an award.

Statutory nature of Standing Orders

The very first argument of Standing Orders as being statutory in nature comes from the case The Bagalkot Cement
Co. Ltd. Vs. R.K. Pathan & Ors. wherein the Supreme Court stated that:

“The object of the Act as we have already seen, was to require the employers to make the conditions of employment
precise and definite and the act ultimately intended to prescribe these conditions in the from of standing orders so
that what used to be governed by a contract hereto before would now be governed by the statutory standing
orders…”.

This decision of the Supreme Court was relied upon in various other judgements to conclude that Standing Orders,
once certified, are statutory in nature. This was reinforced by the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Tata
Chemicals Ltd. And Ors. vs Kailash C. Adhvaryu wherein the judge distinguished between a statutory obligation and
a contractual obligation and therefore came to the conclusion that certification of standing orders under the IESO
Act creates statutory rights and obligations.

Another argument pertaining to the statutory nature of standing orders is that the Certifying Officer, in certifying the
draft of the standing orders made by the employer, is part of a delegated legislation. The process of hearing from
both parties before certifying the standing orders may as well be seen as a consultation of sorts to those affected by
the decision. This, in turn, makes the Certifying Officer, part of a rule-making process, thus making the entire
process statutory in nature.

Arguments against the statutory nature of standing orders can be put forward as follows:

● If we are to assume that the standing orders are statutory in nature, then they are in contradiction to the
fundamental rights given to citizens in our constitution; the constitutional validity of these statutory
rights and obligations against our fundamental rights can be argued by parties under Article 32 and
Article 226 of the constitution. Another aspect to consider is the infringement of Article 14 and the
Right to Equality caused by assuming certified standing orders as statutory in nature and applying it to
workmen of like industries and under similar circumstances.
● The second argument against the statutory nature of standing orders is that Tribunals are not supposed
to have the power to override provisions having statutory effect. Industrial Tribunals, under The
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, have the power to create new rights and obligations and to vary terms of
an agreement or contract pertaining to the proprietary or legality of an order passed by an employee
under standing orders and the application and interpretation of standing orders. If we consider certified
standing rights as statutory in nature, it negates the power for the tribunals to override and create
changes and modifications in the standing orders, thus hampering its power to provide industrial
justice.
● Section 10(1) of the IESO Act clearly states that even after the certification of the standing orders, they
are liable to change on agreement between the employers and the workmen. This is in complete
contradiction to the statutory nature of standing orders as no statute can be modified on agreement
between two parties. Provisions with true statutory effects are not susceptible to amendments based on
agreements between two parties.
● Lastly, the Act imposes restrictions on the bargaining power of the employers curtailing the freedom of
contract so that employers must present draft standing orders which are compatible with the statute. In
no way does the Act delegate any legislative powers to any authority but rather, it imposes an
obligation on an individual employer to make rules keeping in mind the model standing orders given in
the schedule. Furthermore, the Certifying officer has only limited judicial power. Thus, we understand
that certified standing orders are not delegated legislation and hence, are not statutory in nature.

Standing Orders as an ‘award’

Section 4 of the IESO Act states that the decision maker or the Certifying Officer, after hearing both the parties,
adjudicates upon the “fairness or reasonableness” of standing orders laying down the conditions of the employment.
This, in turn, makes standing orders as a kind of “award”. But this cannot be the case, as the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 does not consider the Certifying Officers as the decision makers in matters of industrial disputes and thus the
standing orders cannot be an award. Also, the Certifying Officer does not, in any way or form, settle an industrial
dispute; he merely modifies or certifies the draft standing orders after hearing both the parties. Another aspect to
consider would be that if we consider the standing order as an award, certain provisions pertaining to limitations on
lock-outs and strikes would come into play as given under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Lastly, Section 13(2) of
IESO Act makes the employer liable for any contravention of the standing orders, thus contradicting the principle
that an award is as binding and applicable to one party as it is to the other.
So we conclude that certified standing orders are neither completely statutory in effect nor do they fall under the
category of an award.

Standing Orders as special kinds of contracts

The certified standing orders have a statutory force but they are not necessarily statutory in nature as we have
already discussed. The standing order implies a contract between the employer and the workman. Therefore, the
employer and workman cannot enter into contract overriding the statutory contract as embodied in the certified
standing orders. While the standing orders are in force it is not permissible for the employer to seek their statutory
modifications which leads to there being one set of standing orders in respect of certain employees and another set
for others.

Therefore, no workman can be appointed by the employer with terms and conditions different from those defined in
the standing orders unless the standing orders are modified in accordance with the provisions of matter discussed in
the Schedule of the IESO Act. It is not open to an Industrial Tribunal to ignore an existing standing order in matters
that refer to individual discipline. And no Industrial Tribunal can make amendments and modifications in standing
orders unless they are contractual in nature.

An argument in favor of the contractual nature of standing order comes from the case of Buckingham and Carnatic
Co. Vs. Venkatayga wherein Justice Gajendragadkar stated that:

“The certified Standing Orders represent the relevant terms and conditions of service in a statutory form and they
are binding on the parties at least as much, if not more, as private contracts embodying similar terms and
conditions of service.”

Another statement in favor of the contractual nature of standing order comes from Mettur Industries Ltd Vs. A.R.
Varma And Ors the High Court of Madras stated that:

“Reading the Act as a whole it is clear that the standing orders form part of the contract between the management
and every one of its employees.”

Lastly, in an amendment of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1964, the following was added to Section 33:

“…or, where there are no such standing orders, in accordance with the terms of the contract, whether express or
implied, between him and the workman.”

Thus, clearly strengthening the argument for the contractual nature of the standing orders.

Conclusion

When we consider the nature of Standing Orders individually as statutory, contractual or as an award, we can
conclude positively that it doesn’t fit under any one category completely. There are solid arguments against
successful categorization of Standing Orders and thus the nature of Standing Orders can be concluded as amorphous
and ambiguous in nature.
Certification process- its operation and binding effect of certificate standing order:
Certified Standing Orders (CSOs) are rules and regulations which are designed by employers to regulate the terms
and conditions of employment of their employees. These orders are aimed at promoting better working conditions,
ensuring the safety of employees, and promoting harmonious relations between the employer and employees.
Certified Standing Orders are governed by various laws in India like the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)
Act, 1946 [1]which deals with the certification of standing orders and the rules and regulations which are to be
followed by employers to ensure that their standing orders are compliant with the requirements of the Act. This
essay will explore the nature and effect of certified standing orders with rule and regulations and refer to relevant
case laws that have shaped the interpretation and application of this area of law. The Industrial Employment
(Standing Orders) Act, 1946, is an important legislation in India that regulates the working conditions of industrial
workers. The Act mandates that every industrial establishment with a workforce of 100 or more workers shall
provide certified standing orders under Section 3 of the Act[2]. The certified standing orders establish rules and
regulations governing the relationship between the employer and the employee in a particular industrial
establishment.
Meaning
The certified standing orders are a legal document that is binding on both the employer and the employee, and any
breach of the standing orders constitutes misconduct by the employee.
The certified standing orders have been recognized by the Indian judiciary as a part of the contract of employment
between the parties. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, provides the statutory framework for
the drafting and certification of the standing orders.
In India, Certified Standing Orders play an essential role in the industrial sector. It contributes to the maintenance of
law and order and fosters industrial discipline, which results in increased productivity and efficiency. For the
management, CSOs provide clarity in terms of the roles, responsibilities, and expectations of the organization. They
make decision-making more productive as employees may know what is expected of them, and the employer may
take disciplinary action in case an employee misconduct.
CSOs benefit the employees by providing them with a sense of security and certainty in regard to their employment
terms and conditions. Conditions of work, pay scale, work hours, leave policy, job security, and grievance redressal
mechanisms are laid down in a straightforward language accessible to all employees.
Nature of Certified Standing Orders
Certified Standing Orders are a set of rules and regulations which are designed by employers to govern the terms
and conditions of employment of their employees. These orders are mandatory in nature and provide an exhaustive
list of the rights and obligations of both the employer and employee. The primary objective of certified standing
orders is to ensure that there is a clear demarcation of duties and responsibilities between the employer and
employee.
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, mandates that all industrial establishments, which employ
a minimum of 100 workmen, must submit their draft standing orders to the certifying officer for approval. The
certifying officer is appointed by the State Government and must be satisfied that the standing orders submitted by
the employer are legally compliant and in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The certifying officer may
make modifications to the draft standing orders if they are found to be non-compliant with the provisions of the Act,
and the employer must incorporate these changes in the final standing orders. Once the standing orders have been
certified, they become binding on both the employer and the employees. The certified standing orders set out the
terms and conditions of employment, such as leave entitlements, working hours, termination of employment, etc.
A certified standing order is a legal document that governs the terms and conditions of employment and regulates
the working conditions of industrial workers. The standing orders are drafted by the employer in consultation with
the employees or their representatives. The standing orders are then submitted to the certifying officer for
certification of the document. The certifying officer verifies whether the standing orders conform to the provisions
of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and once satisfied, issues a certificate of approval.
The certified standing orders are binding on both the employer and the employee. They can be used to resolve
disputes between the employer and the employee or between two employees. The certified standing orders can also
be used as evidence in any legal proceedings.
Effect of Certified Standing Orders
The certified standing orders have several effects on the relationship between the employer and the employee.
Firstly, they provide certainty and predictability in the employment relationship. The employees are aware of their
rights and duties, and their expectations are predefined. Similarly, the employer knows the expectations of the
employees, which leads to a smooth functioning of the industrial establishment.
Secondly, the certified standing orders regulate the conduct of the employees. They provide guidelines for the
employees to follow, which leads to a harmonious working environment. The certified standing orders also provide
guidelines for the management to follow, which lead to a fair and just treatment of the employees.
Thirdly, the certified standing orders provide a framework for resolving disputes between the employer and the
employee or between two employees. The standing orders provide a mechanism for resolving disputes through
conciliation, which can be exercised by the employer, the employee, or a conciliator appointed by the state
government.
The effect of certified standing orders is that they become binding on both the employer and the employee. The
provisions of certified standing orders prevail over any other terms of employment which may be in conflict with the
standing orders. Any contravention of the certified standing orders by either the employer or the employee may lead
to disciplinary action being taken against them.
Certified standing orders also provide a sense of security to both the employer and the employee as they provide a
clear framework for the functioning of the workplace. They ensure that there is uniformity in the terms and
conditions of employment and prevent arbitrary or discriminatory treatment of employees.
Case Law
The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Management of Punjab National Bank v All India Punjab National Bank
Employees Federation and Others[3], held that the certified standing orders are not only binding on the employer
and the employees but also on the trade unions representing the employees. The standing order must be adhered to
in letter and spirit by all parties concerned.
In the case of Delhi Transport Corporation v Dal Chand Yadav & Ors[4], the Supreme Court held that the certified
standing orders are a part of the contract of employment between the employer and the employee. Any change in the
standing orders must be done in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)
Act, 1946, and with the mutual agreement of the employer and the employee.
The binding nature of certified standing orders has been established in various cases. In the case of Y M Raja Ram
v. S Muthu Kumar, it was held that certified standing orders were binding on both the employer and employee and
any contravention of the same would lead to disciplinary action against the concerned party. The Court further held
that employees could only be dismissed in accordance with the provisions of the certified standing orders and not
otherwise.
In the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. V. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court[5], it was held that certified standing
orders override any other terms of employment which are in conflict with the standing orders. It was further held
that any alterations in the certified standing orders must be made in compliance with the provisions of the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, provides the legal framework for certified standing orders
in India. The Act defines a standard format for the standing orders policy and prescribes the process of drafting and
certifying them.
Further, various court cases have upheld the legal sanctity of the certified standing orders. In Express Newspapers
Ltd vs Its Workmen [6], it was ruled that standing orders provide an essential motive for Industrial Relations by
ensuring that both the employees and employers are aware of their rights and responsibilities. It is also observed in
Lakshmi Mills Company Limited (2014) where the court observed that certified standing orders benefit both
employers and employees by establishing mutually agreeable work conditions and rules, reducing misunderstanding,
and improving working relationships.
Moreover, the Code on Occupational Safety, Health, and Working Conditions Act, 2020, provides further guidelines
for the employers in regard to working conditions, safety measures, and compensation. The Code applies to all
workers, including casual, temporary, and contractual employees.
Statutory Provisions
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946[7], provides the legal framework for drafting and certifying
the standing orders. The Act provides for the constitution of a certifying officer, the procedure for certification, the
period of validity of the certified standing orders, and the consequences of non-compliance with the standing orders.
Section 10 of the Act provides that any contravention of the certified standing orders constitutes a misconduct by the
employee, which may lead to disciplinary action by the employer. Similarly, Section 25(g) of the Industrial Disputes
Act, 1947[8], provides that a dismissal or discharge of an employee shall not be deemed to be valid unless the
provisions of the standing orders have been complied with.
Conclusion
Certified standing orders are an important aspect of labour law in India. It is an integral part of the employment
relationship in India. They provide a clear framework for the functioning of the workplace and ensure that there is
uniformity in the terms and conditions of employment. Certified standing orders also provide a sense of security to
both employers and employees and prevent arbitrary or discriminatory treatment of employees. They provide a
framework for regulating the working conditions of industrial workers and resolving disputes between the employer
and the employee. The binding nature of certified standing orders has been established in various cases and it is
important for employers to comply with the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
when drafting and implementing certified standing orders.

modification and Temporary application of Model standing Orders

The Standing Orders of an organization are a set of rules and regulations that govern the conduct of employees
within the workplace. These orders are usually created by the management of the organization and are designed to
ensure that employees adhere to specific guidelines while carrying out their duties.

In the context of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, these orders are legally binding
documents that must be created and registered with the appropriate authority. The Act provides for the regulation of
conditions of employment in industrial establishments and requires that employers create standing orders that
specify the terms and conditions of employment for their workers.

The standing orders must be clear and unambiguous, and they must cover a range of issues such as the duties and
responsibilities of employees, working hours, leave entitlements, disciplinary procedures, and grievance redressal
mechanisms. The purpose of these orders is to create a transparent and consistent framework for employment that
protects the interests of both employees and employers. The interpretation and enforcement of these standing orders
are crucial for ensuring a fair and equitable workplace. Employers must ensure that their standing orders are in
compliance with the provisions of the Act and that they are being implemented correctly. This requires a thorough
understanding of the Act and its provisions, as well as a commitment to upholding the principles of fairness and
transparency in the workplace. The enforcement of these standing orders is the responsibility of the management of
the organization, and they must take appropriate action if an employee is found to be in violation of any of the
orders. At the same time, employees must be aware of their rights and responsibilities under the standing orders and
must adhere to them to avoid any disciplinary action.

Application of act

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, applies to all industrial establishments that employ 100 or
more workers, and it is mandatory for such establishments to create and register standing orders with the appropriate
authority. The Act also applies to industrial establishments with fewer than 100 workers if the State Government has
extended the provisions of the Act to such establishments.

The Act applies to all types of industrial establishments, including manufacturing units, mines, oilfields, railways,
and other such industries. It covers all categories of workers, including permanent, temporary, and contract workers.
The Act provides guidelines for the creation and registration of standing orders, which must cover a range of issues
related to employment, such as the duties and responsibilities of employees, working hours, leave entitlements,
disciplinary procedures, and grievance redressal mechanisms. The Act also specifies that any changes made to the
standing orders must be approved by the appropriate authority and that the orders must be displayed prominently in
the workplace for the benefit of all employees. The Act places a responsibility on the employer to enforce the
standing orders and take appropriate disciplinary action against any employee who violates them. At the same time,
it also provides for a grievance redressal mechanism that allows employees to raise their concerns and complaints
through a designated channel.

Exclusion of certain industrial establishments

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, provides for the regulation of conditions of employment in
industrial establishments. However, certain industrial establishments are excluded from the purview of the Act.

The Act does not apply to industrial establishments that are primarily of a seasonal character or are intermittent in
nature. This exclusion applies to establishments such as sugar mills, cotton ginning and pressing factories, and tea
plantations, which operate only during a particular season or for a limited period. The Act also excludes
establishments that are engaged in work that is primarily of a casual nature. This exclusion applies to establishments
such as loading and unloading docks, wharves, and warehouses, where the work is of a casual nature and employees
are not engaged in a regular employment relationship.

Power to exempt: Section 14

Section 14 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, empowers the appropriate government to
exempt any industrial establishment or class of industrial establishments from the provisions of the Act if it is
satisfied that the standing orders in force in the establishment or class of establishments provide benefits to workers
that are not less favorable than those provided under the Act.

The appropriate government may grant such an exemption for a specific period, subject to such conditions as it may
impose. The government may also withdraw the exemption if it is satisfied that the standing orders in force in the
establishment or class of establishments no longer provide benefits that are not less favorable than those provided
under the Act.

The power to grant exemptions is intended to provide flexibility in the application of the Act and to ensure that the
interests of workers are protected. The appropriate government may grant exemptions based on factors such as the
size of the establishment, the nature of the work, and the presence of alternative arrangements for the regulation of
conditions of employment.

Special features of the act

The Act envisages three important features, they are:

● Concept of Standing Orders.

● Adjudicatory powers of the Certifying Officer; and
● CSOs (short for – Certified Standing Orders) have the force of law.

Whether a contract can override the certified Standing Orders?

No, a contract cannot override the certified Standing Orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)
Act, 1946. The Act requires employers of industrial establishments to create and register Standing Orders that
specify the terms and conditions of employment for their workers.

Once the Standing Orders have been certified by the appropriate authority, they become legally binding on both the
employer and the workers. Any agreement or contract that is inconsistent with the provisions of the certified
Standing Orders is void to the extent of such inconsistency.

Therefore, even if a worker has signed a contract that contains terms and conditions that are different from those
specified in the certified Standing Orders, the provisions of the Standing Orders will prevail. The worker is entitled
to the benefits and protections provided under the Standing Orders, regardless of any agreement to the contrary.

Standing Orders

Section 2(g) of the Act states that “standing orders” are the rules relating to matters set out in the Schedule, i.e., with
reference to:

● The classification of workmen.

● Manner of intimation to workers about work and wage-related details.
● Attendance, conditions of granting leaves, etc.
● Rights & liabilities of the employer/ workmen in certain circumstances.
● Conditions of ‘termination of’/ ‘suspension from’ employment; and
 ● Means of redressal for workmen, or any other matter.

Submission of Draft Standing Orders: Section 3

Section 3 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, requires every employer of an industrial
establishment employing 100 or more workers to submit draft Standing Orders to the Certifying Officer for
certification.

The draft Standing Orders should contain provisions that specify the following:

1. Manner of intimating to workers periods and hours of work, holidays, paydays, and wage rates.
2. Conditions under which overtime is to be worked and the rates of payment for such overtime.
3. Shift working.
4. Attendance and late coming.
5. Leave rules.
6. Suspension or dismissal for misconduct and the procedure for imposing such penalties.
7. Grievance redressal mechanism.
8. Any other matter which may be prescribed by the appropriate government.

The employer must submit the draft Standing Orders in the prescribed form and manner, along with a statement of
the number of workers employed in the establishment, to the Certifying Officer. The Certifying Officer then
examines the draft Standing Orders and may modify them if necessary.

The employer and the employees have the right to appear before the Certifying Officer and make representations in
respect of the draft Standing Orders. Once the Standing Orders have been certified by the Certifying Officer, they
become legally binding on the employer and the employees.

Conditions for Certification of Standing Orders: Section 4

Section 4 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, lays down the conditions that must be fulfilled
for the certification of Standing Orders by the Certifying Officer. The Certifying Officer is an official appointed by
the appropriate government to examine and certify the Standing Orders submitted by the employer of an industrial
establishment.

The conditions for certification of Standing Orders under Section 4 are as follows:

1. The Standing Orders must be clear and precise, and must not be in conflict with any law for the time being
in force.
2. The Standing Orders must specify the rights and obligations of both the employer and the employees.
3. The Standing Orders must not be prejudicial to the interests of the employees.
4. The Standing Orders must be consistent with the Model Standing Orders prescribed by the appropriate
government, if any.
5. The Standing Orders must be displayed prominently in the establishment in English and in the language
understood by the majority of the workers.
The Certifying Officer examines the draft Standing Orders submitted by the employer and may modify them if
necessary to ensure that they meet the above conditions. The employer and the employees have the right to appear
before the Certifying Officer and make representations in respect of the draft Standing Orders.

Once the Standing Orders have been certified by the Certifying Officer, they become legally binding on both the
employer and the employees. Any modifications to the Standing Orders require the consent of both the employer
and the employees and must be submitted to the Certifying Officer for certification.

Certification Process: Section 5

Section 5 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with the certification process of Standing
Orders by the Certifying Officer. The Certifying Officer is an official appointed by the appropriate government to
examine and certify the Standing Orders submitted by the employer of an industrial establishment.

The certification process under Section 5 involves the following steps:

1. Submission of draft Standing Orders: The employer of an industrial establishment employing 100 or more
workers is required to submit draft Standing Orders to the Certifying Officer in the prescribed form and
manner, along with a statement of the number of workers employed in the establishment.
2. Examination of draft Standing Orders: The Certifying Officer examines the draft Standing Orders and may
modify them if necessary to ensure that they meet the conditions laid down in Section 4 of the Act. The
employer and the employees have the right to appear before the Certifying Officer and make
representations in respect of the draft Standing Orders.
3. Certification of Standing Orders: Once the Standing Orders have been examined and modified (if
necessary) by the Certifying Officer, they are certified by him. The certified Standing Orders are then
binding on both the employer and the employees.
4. Display of certified Standing Orders: The certified Standing Orders are required to be prominently
displayed in the establishment in English and in the language understood by the majority of the workers.
5. Filing of certified Standing Orders: The employer is required to file five copies of the certified Standing
Orders with the Certifying Officer. One copy is kept by the Certifying Officer, one is sent to the
appropriate government, and the remaining copies are kept by the employer for reference.

Appeals: Section 6

Section 6 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with the appeals that can be made
against the decision of the Certifying Officer regarding the certification of Standing Orders.

According to Section 6, any employer or workman aggrieved by the decision of the Certifying Officer regarding the
certification of Standing Orders may appeal to an appellate authority appointed by the appropriate government. The
appeal must be made within 30 days from the date on which the certified Standing Orders are made available to the
parties concerned.

The appellate authority has the power to confirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the Certifying Officer. The
decision of the appellate authority is final and binding on the parties concerned.

It is important to note that the filing of an appeal does not suspend the operation of the certified Standing Orders
unless the appellate authority directs otherwise.

Modification of Standing Order: Section 10

The process of modification of Standing Orders involves the following steps:

 1. Preparation of draft modification: The employer prepares a draft modification of the certified Standing
Orders.
2. Consultation with employee representatives: The employer consults the employee representatives, if any,
regarding the proposed modification.
3. Submission of draft modification: The employer submits the draft modification to the Certifying Officer for
approval. The submission should be in the same manner as the submission of draft Standing Orders.
4. Examination by the Certifying Officer: The Certifying Officer examines the proposed modification and
may approve it with or without modifications or reject it.
5. Certification of modified Standing Orders: If the Certifying Officer approves the proposed modification, he
certifies the modified Standing Orders, and they become binding on the employer and the employees.
6. Display and filing of modified Standing Orders: The employer is required to display the modified Standing
Orders in the establishment and file a copy with the Certifying Officer, in the same manner as the certified
Standing Orders.

It is important to note that the process of modification of Standing Orders is similar to the process of certification of
Standing Orders. The main difference is that in the case of modification, the employer proposes the changes,
whereas in the case of certification, the employer submits the draft Standing Orders.

Payment of Subsistence Allowance: Section 10-A

Section 10-A of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with the payment of subsistence
allowance to workmen who are suspended pending inquiry or disciplinary action.

According to this section, if a workman is suspended by the employer pending inquiry or disciplinary action, and the
inquiry or disciplinary proceedings against the workman are not concluded within a period of 90 days, the workman
shall be entitled to receive a subsistence allowance. The subsistence allowance payable shall be equal to 50% of the
wages which the workman was entitled to immediately before the suspension.

The subsistence allowance shall be paid to the workman within a period of 30 days from the date on which it
becomes payable, and in case of any delay in payment, the employer shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate
of 12% per annum on the amount payable.

It is important to note that the entitlement to subsistence allowance arises only if the inquiry or disciplinary
proceedings are not concluded within a period of 90 days from the date of suspension. If the proceedings are
concluded within the stipulated period, the workman shall not be entitled to receive the subsistence allowance.

Temporary Application of Model Standing Orders: Section 12-A

Section 12-A of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with the temporary application of
Model Standing Orders.

According to this section, if the Certifying Officer is of the opinion that there are no certified Standing Orders in
force in an industrial establishment, he may direct the employer to follow the Model Standing Orders set out in the
Schedule of the Act. The Model Standing Orders shall be deemed to be the certified Standing Orders of the
establishment until the employer frames and certifies its own Standing Orders in accordance with the provisions of
the Act.

The temporary application of Model Standing Orders can also be ordered by the Appropriate Government in respect
of any industrial establishment or class of industrial establishments, by notification in the Official Gazette. The
Model Standing Orders shall have effect as if they were certified Standing Orders of the establishment or class of
establishments until the employer frames and certifies its own Standing Orders in accordance with the provisions of
the Act.
It is important to note that the temporary application of Model Standing Orders is meant to be a temporary measure
until the employer frames and certifies its own Standing Orders. The Model Standing Orders are only applicable in
the absence of certified Standing Orders and are not meant to be a substitute for certified Standing Orders.

Penalties and procedure: Section 13

Section 13 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with penalties for contravention of the
provisions of the Act, and the procedure to be followed for such contraventions.

According to this section, any employer who contravenes the provisions of the Act or fails to comply with the
directions of the Certifying Officer or the Appellate Authority shall be punishable with a fine of up to Rs. 500. If the
contravention or failure continues, the employer shall be liable to a further fine of up to Rs. 50 for each day during
which the contravention or failure continues after the conviction for the first such contravention or failure.

The section also provides for the appointment of Inspectors for the purposes of the Act. An Inspector may enter any
industrial establishment, inspect the Standing Orders and take copies thereof, examine any person, and require the
production of any registers, records or other documents required to be kept under the Act. If the Inspector is of the
opinion that any contravention of the provisions of the Act has taken place, he may initiate proceedings against the
employer.

The procedure for initiating proceedings against the employer is also outlined in this section. The Inspector shall
submit a report to the Certifying Officer, who shall then issue a notice to the employer requiring him to show cause
why proceedings should not be initiated against him. If the Certifying Officer is satisfied that a contravention of the
provisions of the Act has taken place, he may initiate proceedings against the employer and follow the prescribed
procedure for such proceedings.

Interpretation and enforcement of Standing Orders and provisions contained in the Industrial relations Code 2020.

Interpretation of Standing Orders: Section 13-A

Section 13-A of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, deals with the interpretation of Standing
Orders.

According to this section, any question or dispute arising as to the interpretation of any Standing Order that has been
certified under the Act shall be referred to the Certifying Officer or any other authority specified in this behalf by the
Appropriate Government. The Certifying Officer or the specified authority shall, after giving the parties concerned
an opportunity of being heard, decide the question or dispute.

The decision of the Certifying Officer or the specified authority on the question or dispute referred to him shall be
final and binding on the parties concerned, subject to the right of the parties to approach the appropriate court for
relief, if any, in accordance with the provisions of any law for the time being in force.

It is important to note that this section applies only to the interpretation of certified Standing Orders under the Act.
Any dispute or question arising as to the interpretation of uncertified Standing Orders or other terms and conditions
of employment would not fall within the purview of this section.

Delegation of Powers: Section 14-A

According to this section, the appropriate Government may, by notification in the official gazette, delegate any of its
powers under this Act to any officer subordinate to it, subject to such conditions and restrictions as it may specify in
the notification.
The delegated officer shall exercise the powers delegated to him subject to the conditions and restrictions specified
in the notification. Any act done by the delegated officer in the exercise of his delegated powers shall be deemed to
have been done by the appropriate government itself.

It is important to note that the delegation of powers under this section does not affect the power of the appropriate
government to exercise its powers under this Act. The appropriate government may, at any time, revoke or modify
the delegation of powers made under this section.

Power to make rules: Section 15

The rules made under this section may provide for a range of matters, including but not limited to the following:

1. The form and manner of submission of draft standing orders to the certifying officer
2. The conditions and qualifications of the certifying officer and the appellate authority
3. The fees to be paid for certification and appeals.
4. The manner in which notice of standing orders is to be given to workmen.
5. The form and manner of complaints by workmen in case of breach of standing orders
6. The procedure for referring disputes arising out of the interpretation of standing orders to the certifying
officer or any other specified authority.

The rules made under this section may also provide for any other matter which is necessary for carrying out the
purposes of the Act.

It is important to note that any rules made under this section shall be laid before the state legislature or both houses
of parliament (depending on whether the appropriate government is a state government or the central government,
respectively) and shall be subject to their approval.

Landmark Judgements

1. Hindustan Lever v. Workmen

The Hindustan Lever v. Workmen case is a landmark labor law case in India. It was decided by the Supreme Court
of India in 1974. The case involved a dispute between the management of Hindustan Lever Limited (now known as
Hindustan Unilever Limited) and its workmen over the termination of services of certain employees.

The dispute arose when Hindustan Lever Limited terminated the services of 28 workmen, citing a clause in their
employment contracts that allowed termination without notice or payment in lieu of notice. The workmen
challenged the termination, arguing that the clause was arbitrary and violated their right to equality under Article 14
of the Indian Constitution.

The case was initially heard by the Industrial Tribunal, which upheld the termination. The workmen then appealed to
the Bombay High Court, which set aside the Tribunal’s decision and held that the termination was illegal. Hindustan
Lever Limited then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court, holding that the termination was illegal and that
the clause in the employment contracts was arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The
Court held that the right to equality included the right to equal treatment in matters of employment and that arbitrary
termination of employment was a violation of that right.
The Hindustan Lever v. Workmen case is significant because it established the principle that the right to equality
under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution extends to the realm of employment and that arbitrary termination of
employment is unconstitutional. The case has been cited in numerous subsequent labor law cases in India.

● Management of Continental Construction Ltd. v Workmen of Continental Construction, (2003)

The Management of Continental Construction Ltd. v Workmen of Continental Construction case is a landmark labor
law case in India. It was decided by the Supreme Court of India in 2003.

The case involved a dispute between the management of Continental Construction Ltd. and its workmen over the
payment of bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The management argued that the workmen were not
entitled to bonus as they had not worked for the requisite number of days in the relevant accounting year. The
workmen challenged this, arguing that the management had deliberately reduced their working hours in order to
deny them the bonus.

The case was initially heard by the Industrial Tribunal, which held that the management had not deliberately reduced
the working hours of the workmen and that they were not entitled to bonus. The workmen then appealed to the
Bombay High Court, which reversed the decision of the Tribunal and held that the workmen were entitled to bonus.

The management of Continental Construction Ltd. then appealed to the Supreme Court, which upheld the decision
of the Bombay High Court. The Court held that the management had deliberately reduced the working hours of the
workmen in order to deny them the bonus and that the workmen were entitled to the bonus under the Payment of
Bonus Act, 1965.

The Management of Continental Construction Ltd. v Workmen of Continental Construction case is significant
because it establishes the principle that the management cannot deliberately reduce the working hours of the
workmen in order to deny them the bonus. The case has been cited in numerous subsequent labor law cases in India.

● S.K. Sheshadri v H.A.L and others, (1983)

The S.K. Sheshadri v H.A.L and others case is a significant labor law case in India. It was decided by the Supreme
Court of India in 1983.

The case involved a dispute between S.K. Sheshadri, an employee of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), and
the management of HAL. Sheshadri had been promoted to the post of Assistant Personnel Officer but was
subsequently transferred to a lower post of Assistant Administrative Officer. Sheshadri challenged this transfer,
arguing that it was arbitrary and that it violated his right to equality under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution.

The case was initially heard by the Karnataka High Court, which held that the transfer was arbitrary and that
Sheshadri was entitled to be reinstated to his previous post. The management of HAL then appealed to the Supreme
Court.

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Karnataka High Court, holding that the transfer of Sheshadri was
arbitrary and that it violated his right to equality under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The Court held that the
power of the management to transfer employees must be exercised reasonably and in accordance with the principles
of natural justice.

The S.K. Sheshadri v H.A.L and others case are significant because it establishes the principle that the power of the
management to transfer employees must be exercised reasonably and in accordance with the principles of natural
justice. The case has been cited in numerous subsequent labor law cases in India.

Conclusion
The Act is a regulatory regime to formally define the employment relations between the workmen/trade union and
the employer. A very prominent initiative of this Act is the concept of ‘standing orders’ which is amorphous in
nature being a contract promulgated statutorily, that represents the will of the parties so regulated. Finally, it may be
stated that, though it lays an exemplary notion, it requires thorough reforms in respect of the present scenario of
employment practiced by the principal employer so as to fulfill the Constitutional objective of securing socio-
economic justice substantially.

Interpretation and enforcement of Standing Orders and provisions contained in the Industrial relations Code
2020.

Background
In the background of the unprecedented slump that the Indian economy is currently going through on account of the
Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting lockdowns, it had become imperative to bring in some long awaited changes to
the Indian labour laws to provide businesses with more leeway to operate and adapt to stay competitive in the global
markets. This was also necessary from the point of view of making India self-sufficient. But as the three Codes
(recently passed by Parliament in the absence of any significant opposition) set about to revamp the entire Indian
Labour Law, what does it entail for the Indian industry and its workmen? In this article we shall be taking a closer
look at the Industrial Relations Code, 2020[1]. The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 seeks to consolidate and modify
the laws relating to trade unions, conditions of employment in industrial establishments or undertakings and
investigation and settlement of industrial disputes. It shall replace the Trade Unions Act, 1926, the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Changes to legal terms
Interestingly, the explanation for the term “appropriate government” mentions that the Central Government shall
continue to be the appropriate Government for the Central Public Sector Undertakings even where the Government
has divested its stake to below 50%. This could potentially provide a pathway to the Government to undertake
further divestment in the PSUs in the future while assuaging the redressal demands of the PSUs employees. The
scope of coverage has been widened to include all employees including supervisory, managerial and administrative
staff that were up to now excluded from the ambit of the Industrial Disputes Act. The scope of the term “employer”
has also been widened to include almost all employer including contractors and legal representatives of a deceased
employer, which were up to now not a part of the said term under the Industrial Disputes Act. Similarly, the
definition of the term “workers” (which replaces the term “workman” used in the Industrial Disputes Act) also
includes persons employed in supervisory work and even includes working journalists and sales promotion
employees. By extension, the widening of these terms also serves to extend the ambit of “industrial dispute” itself.
The definition of the term “industry” has also been elaborated upon to include most enterprises for production,
supply and distribution of goods while excluding charitable organisation, sovereign function of the Government and
domestic workers. The definitions of “lay-off”, “lock out” and “retrenchment” have not seen much of a significant
change. The term “strike” will now include absenteeism or refusal to work of more than 50% workers. The term
“wages” for the purposes of this Code will now constitute basic pay, dearness allowance and retaining allowance,
while specifically excluding bonus, HRA, PF contribution of employer, conveyance allowance, overtime allowance,
commission, gratuity and any other retirement benefits.
A positive role for the Trade Unions
The new Code prescribes that to be registered and recognised any Trade Union must have (and must continue to
have post registration) at least the subscription of 10% workmen or 100 workmen employed in an industrial
establishment, whichever is less. Despite being considered body corporates unto themselves the Trade Unions shall
be excluded from the purview of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912, the
Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 and the Companies Act, 2013. Despite retaining the concept of a Works
Committee, the new Code also recognises the recognised Trade Union (the Trade Union with the subscription of
51% or more workers in case of more than one Trade Union) as the sole negotiating union or the negotiating
council. Disputes between rival Trade Unions or between Trade Unions and its constituent workers will be
adjudicated by the Tribunal. As a precautionary measure to the overtaking of such Trade Unions by external vested
interest or mere political aspirants, the Code provides that at least a half of the office bearers of the Trade Union in
an unorganised sector shall be persons actually employed in the establishment or the industry. The Standing Orders
under the new law shall apply to every industrial establishment with 300 or more workers (up from the Industrial
Disputes Act where this threshold was 100). The Central Government shall make model standing orders and the
employers shall follow suit with their draft standing orders based thereupon within 6 months therefrom. The Trade
Unions shall be consulted therein and the draft Standing Orders shall then be certified by a Certifying Officer.
Push for Alternate Dispute Redressal mechanisms
In my opinion, where the new Code truly shines is in its significant push to avail multiple avenues outside of the
traditional labour courts for grievance and dispute redressal. A laudable initiative in the new Code is the provision
for the constitution of a Grievance Redressal Committee in all establishments employing 20 or more workers as an
in-house redressal mechanism for fast-track redressal (within 30 days) of the grievances of individual workers. The
appeal there from goes to the Conciliation Officer. The appeal from the Conciliation Officer in turn goes to the
Industrial Tribunal. Further, in keeping with the times, the new Code has done well to introduce Alternate Dispute
Resolution in the Industrial Dispute Redressal mechanism by providing for the provision for voluntary reference and
redressal of disputes by way of arbitration. The new Code further provides recognition to settlements (both within
and outside conciliation proceedings) and arbitration awards by making them binding on the parties involved.
Besides the usual Industrial Tribunal, the new Code also provides for the establishment of one or more National
Industrial Tribunals which shall adjudicate such disputes (by consensus), that are deemed to be of national
importance or concern establishments in more than one States, as are referred to it. A very important aspect of the
new Code is that it shall also affect all pending disputes which will be transferred to the appropriate forum under the
new Code and adjudicated either de novo or from the present stage as deemed fit. An interesting aspect of the Code
is that the appropriate State Government or the Central Government gets a choice to exercise veto on enforcement of
any award on “public grounds affecting the national economy or social justice” subject to the subsequent approval of
such executive action by the State Legislature or Parliament as the case may be. The new Code also allows workers
to recover money from their employers by initiating proceedings in the prescribed manner with the appropriate
Government.

Hire and Fire or Misfire?

The general provisions for continuous service, lay-offs, retrenchment and notice before the closure of business
remain more or less the same in the new Code as in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, where the new
Code is a game-changer is in providing employers with more flexibility in hiring and firing by way of appointing
fixed-term workers. At the same time, the new Code seeks to balance the scales by extending all the statutory
benefits including gratuity to such fixed-term employees as are employed for over a year. In another much-needed
initiative, the new Code also provides for setting up a worker’s reskilling fund for retrenched workers with
contribution from both, the employers as well as the appropriate Government. While the new Code provides a
breather for businesses by raising the threshold for the Standing Orders and also takes some laudable initiatives on
the disputes redressal side, the major provisions pertaining to layoffs, lockouts and retrenchment (outside of the
fixed term workers) remain largely the same and hence, continue to be severely regulated. Given the largely dismal
outlook of the economy in the near future and the loss of several huge investments opportunities in the recent past, I
fear that this may not be enough and that more sacrifices may be required for the revival of the badly hit Indian
industry and to ensure that it is able to compete competitively with the more favourably placed economies for a
bigger pie of the global trade of goods and services going forward....

UNIT:5
Disciplinary proceedings in Industries-

A disciplinary enquiry is carried out, based on the principles of natural justice, whenever any employee commits any
misconduct, in order to decide the fate of their employment. No specific clauses are provided with respect to the
procedure of the disciplinary enquiry except the Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Rules that provide lists of
acts and omissions considered as misconduct for the purpose of industrial establishments not being in coal mines
and for the purpose of industrial establishments being in coal mines.

The Industrial Establishment (Standing Orders) Act is applicable to the ‘Industrial Establishments’ employing a
hundred or more employees, while the rest are on the discretion of State Government. The establishments that are
not covered by the Standing Orders Act frame their rules prescribing acts and omissions, known as the Service
Rules. In recent years, however, courts have laid down various principles that indicate the correct procedure to be
followed and basic formalities to be observed by the employer in such cases.

Disciplinary Enquiry
The disciplinary enquiry is carried out by the disciplinary committee of the respective establishment in relation to
the matters of misconduct of the employees. Such committee generally comprises of:

1. Workers Representative, such as the member of Trade Union, as specified under Rule 14 (4)(b-a) of the
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Central Rules, 1946.
2. Employers Representative, such as the head of the department where the workman was employed, and
3. An Independent Officer, i.e. an enquiry officer.

An internal hearing, to ascertain the guilt of the workmen of the alleged misconduct, is conducted by the
administrative officer. Domestic Enquiry is mandatory in order to dismiss an employee; however, it is not necessary
for suspending him by way of punishment.

Administrative Rules for Disciplinary Enquiry

The Principle of Natural Justice

The management of the industrial establishments must satisfy the principles of natural justice while maintaining a
neutral attitude towards the workmen. The delinquent employee must be apparently informed about the charges
levelled against him and shall be provided with an opportunity to be heard so he can refute them and establish his
innocence. He must be given an occasion to cross-examine the witnesses in his defence and evidence at the enquiry
should be adduced in his presence. The punishment awarded, if proven guilty, should be in proportion to the
misconduct committed. These principles of natural justice are specified in Sections 2(b), 5(2), 10A (2) and 13A of
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

In Union of India vs. T. R. Verma, 1957 AIR 882 (1958 SCR 499), the court laid down that the principles of
natural justice require the charge sheeted employee shall have an opportunity of adducing the relevant evidence and
that the evidence of the employer should be taken in his presence; he should be given the opportunity of cross-
examining the witnesses examined on behalf of the management, and that no materials should be relied upon against
him without giving him an opportunity to explain to them. Following the procedure, the evidence recorded at an
enquiry is not open to attack.

Right to Make Representation

A delinquent workman should have a right to represent against the findings recorded in the enquiry report to the
disciplinary authority. The right has been laid down in the case of Union of India vs. Mohd. Ramzan Khan, 1991
AIR 471, 1990 SCR Supl. (3) 248.

Procedure for a Disciplinary Enquiry

Fig 1: Procedure for a Disciplinary Enquiry

The principle of natural justice clarifies that no man shall be punished or condemned without giving an opportunity
to justify himself. The Industrial Tribunals, based on this, have laid down the following procedure:

Preliminary Enquiry

In a landmark judgment of Amulya Ratan Mukharjee Vs. Eastern Railway, (1962) LLJ- 11- 540, Cal- H.C., it
observed by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta that:

● “Before making a charge, the Authorities are entitled to have a preliminary investigation or a “Fact-
Finding enquiry” when they receive a complaint from an employer. This is not considered to be a
formal enquiry at all and in such an enquiry, no rules are observed.
● There can be ex-parte examination or investigation and ex-parte report. All this is to enable the
authority to apprise themselves of the real facts and to decide whether the employee should be charge-
sheeted.
● But the departmental enquiry starts from the charge sheet. The charge sheet must be specific and must
set out all the necessary particulars. It is no excuse to say that the delinquent who had knowledge of
previous proceedings should be taken to have known all about the charge sheet.”

Charge Sheet

A charge-sheet essentially contains detailed particulars of the misconduct, specific charges against the workman and
the relevant clauses of the Standing Order under which the workman is liable to the punished.
In Sur Enamel and Stamping Works (P) Ltd. vs. Their Workmen,1963 SC 1914, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in
an attempt to lay down the procedure for conducting an enquiry for industrial adjudication, provided that an enquiry
cannot be said to have been properly held unless:

1. the workman proceeded against must be informed clearly of the charges levelled against him;
2. the witnesses must be examined in the presence of the workman;
3. the workman must be given a fair opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses including himself if he so
wishes; and;
4. the Enquiry Officer must record his findings with reasons in his report. (see here)

Generally, standing orders provide the manner of serving the charge sheet on the workman concerned and where it is
prescribed the procedure should invariably be followed. It can be given personally or by post to the delinquent
worker.

Appointment of Enquiry Officer

Saran Motors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Vs. Vishwanathan 1964 11.LLJ 139, it was observed that:

● “Enquiry Officer should be properly and duly authorised by the competent authority to hold a domestic
enquiry into the charges alleged against an employee. Any person, even an outsider, may be appointed
as an enquiry officer, provided rules or Standing Orders do not bar such an appointment. (see here)
● The Enquiry Officer has the obligation to explain the procedures of enquiry and chargesheet against the
concerned workman.”

Suspension Pending Enquiry

● In the case where a workman who is placed under suspension by the employer pending investigation or
inquiry into complaints or charges of misconduct against him, the employer shall pay to such workman
subsistence allowance in accordance with the provisions of Section 1O-A of the Industrial Employment
(Standing Order) Act, 1946 which provides:

“Where any workman is suspended by the employer pending inquiry into complaints or charges or misconduct
against him, the employer shall pay to such workman subsistence allowance:

● at the rate of 50% of the wages which workman was entitled to immediately preceding the date of such
suspension, for the first 90 days of suspension and;
● at the rate of 75% of such wages for the remaining period of suspension if the delay in the completion
of disciplinary proceedings against such workman is not directly attributable to the conduct of such
workman.”

Explanation by Employee

After a charge sheet has been served on the accused workman, he may send his explanation cum reply in this
manner:

1. admitting the charges and pleading for mercy.

 2. denying the charges in totality.
3. requesting for more time to submit the explanation.

Notice of Enquiry

On receipt of the charge sheet, the employee sends his reply to the Authority. If the Authority found the reply to be
unsatisfactory, he may get a show cause notice from the Authority. This procedure is applied in the case of
Associated Cement Co. Ltd vs. Their workmen and Other 1964 65 26 FJR 289 SC. (see here) which further
states that:

“The workman should be given due intimation of the date on which the enquiry is to be held so that he has an
opportunity to prepare his defence at the enquiry.”

Supply of relevant materials

Management may ask for any document in proof of charge. So, according to the

principles of natural Justice, such copies of those documents should be supplied to the delinquent workman. A
workman who is to answer to charge must not only know the accusation but also the testimony by which the
accusation is supported as enumerated in the case of Meenglass Tea Estate vs. workmen, 1963 11, L.L.J, 392
(S.C.) (see here)

Examination of Witnesses

There is no provision of law under which the Enquiring officers holding domestic enquiries can compel the
attendance of witnesses as under the Codes of Civil Procedure or Criminal Procedure.

Further, some general rules for examination of the witness are mentioned in the judgment of Tata Engineering and
Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs. S.C. Prasad, (1969) 11 L.L.J. 799 (S.C.) (see here)

It was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that:

● “If the allegations mentioned in the charge sheet are denied by the workman in the domestic enquiry
proceedings, the onus for proving those allegations will be upon the shoulders of the management and;
● the witnesses, called by the Management, must be allowed to be cross examined by the workman and;
● the workman must also be given a reasonable opportunity to examine himself and can add any further
pieces of evidence that he might choose in support of his plea.”

Report of Enquiry Officer

● Once the employer and the workman have been heard, the Officer is required to prepare a reasoned
enquiry report which contained every findings in the enquiry and submit it with the Authority.
● Lastly, it is the duty of an enquiry officer to send the Report to the Accused.

Conclusion
Any act or omission of an employee, whether amounts to the misconduct or not, is to be governed in accordance
with the provided list in the Industrial Establishments (Standing Order) Rules. Although no statute or law
specifically lays down the procedure to conduct the disciplinary enquiry, the various judgements of the Industrial
Tribunals, however, have laid down a basic idea of the procedure that ought to be followed while conducting such
an enquiry. The prime principle that is to be taken care throughout the procedure of the enquiry is the principles of
the natural justice that shall be ensured at every step and action to assure the delivery of justice.

Termination of employment
In India, employment can be terminated by the employer or the employee. Either party can end the employment
relationship by giving notice in writing, although the amount of notice required varies depending on the contract
between the employer and employee. Notice can also be given verbally, but this is not as common.
If an employee is terminated without cause, they are entitled to receive severance pay. The amount of severance pay
is typically one month's salary for every year of service, but may be more or less depending on the contract.
The process for terminating an employee in India varies depending on whether the termination is with cause or
without cause. If an employee is being terminated with cause, they will usually be given a chance to improve their
performance or behavior before being ultimately let go. However, if an employee is being terminated without cause,
they will usually be given a set period of notice and severance pay before their employment is ended.
Indian Laws Related to Employee Termination

When it comes to employee termination in India, employers must adhere to the country's laws and regulations.
There are a number of Indian laws that relate to employee termination, including the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,
the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, and the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,
1946.
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 covers all aspects of termination of employment, including layoffs, retrenchment,
and closure of businesses. The law requires employers to give advance notice of any termination plans to both the
employees and the relevant government authorities. Employees who are terminated without proper notice or
compensation are entitled to file a claim with the labour court.
The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 regulates the hiring of contract workers in India. The law
requires employers to obtain a license from the relevant authorities before hiring contract workers. Employers must
also follow certain procedures when terminating contract workers, such as providing them with adequate notice and
compensation.
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 applies to businesses with more than 100 employees. The
law requires employers to formulate 'standing orders' that detail the conditions of employment, including
termination procedures. Standing orders must be approved by the relevant authorities before they can be
implemented. Employees who are terminated without following the proper procedure laid out in the standing orders
are entitled to file a claim with the labour court.
Firing an Employee

In India, there are certain legal issues that need to be adhered to when terminating an employee. The process of
firing an employee can be a complicated one, and it is important to have a clear understanding of the relevant laws
before taking any action.
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 governs the termination of employment in India. Under this Act, an employer
must give notice of termination to the employee, as well as the reason for termination. The notice period depends on
the length of service of the employee: for those who have worked for less than a month, one day's notice is required;
for those who have worked for more than a month but less than three months, two weeks' notice is required; and for
those who have worked for more than three months, four weeks' notice is required.
The employer must also ensure that all statutory dues (such as gratuity and provident fund) are paid to the employee
before terminating their employment.
It is important to note that in India, termination of employment can also be challenged in court if the employee feels
that they have been wrongfully dismissed. Therefore, it is crucial to consult with a lawyer before taking any action.
Procedure to Be Followed

An employee can be terminated from their job on the grounds of misconduct, poor performance, or breach of
contract. The employer must follow due process while terminating an employee so as to avoid any legal
complications.
The first step is to issue a written notice to the employee specifying the grounds for termination. The notice should
give the employee a reasonable opportunity to explain their side of the story.
If the employer is satisfied with the explanation given by the employee, no further action needs to be taken.
However, if the employer is not satisfied, they may proceed with termination.
The next step is to issue a formal termination letter to the employee. This letter should specify the last date of
employment and other relevant details such as payment of outstanding salary, etc.
Once the termination letter has been issued, the employer should ensure that all communication with the employee
ceases. They should also return all company property in the employee's possession.
Certain Safeguards to Consider While Terminating Employees

When terminating an employee, employers in India must consider certain safeguards to avoid legal pitfalls. First, the
employer should have a valid reason for termination that is documented in the employee's file. Second, the employer
should give the employee advance notice of the termination and provide an opportunity for the employee to appeal
the decision. Finally, the employer should ensure that all severance pay and benefits are paid out in accordance with
Indian law.
Due Process for Terminating an Employee in India

Employers are exposed to a number of legal and reputational risks resulting from wrongful termination, or not
following due process.

Employers should, therefore, plan to construct contracts and human resource (HR) materials to ensure that senior
management, HR personnel, and employees are fully apprised of their rights and responsibilities.

Laws governing termination of employees in India

In India, labor law is a concurrent subject in the Indian Constitution, which implies that labor and employment
regulations in the country are governed at both the federal and state levels. The main federal statutes that regulate
the termination of employment include the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act (IESA), 1946 and the
Industrial Disputes Act (IDA), 1947, as amended.

Additionally, the Indian labor is regulated by the Shops and Establishments Act, which is enacted in most states with
minor differences in rules of implementation. The Shops and Establishments Act regulates labor and employment in
all premises where a trade, business, or profession is carried out. Further, the implementation of respective state laws
differs according to the area of operations of the employer—these are outlined in the laws and their supporting rules.

Given the structure of Indian labor laws, there is no standard process to terminate an employee in India. An
employee may be terminated according to terms laid out in the individual labor contract signed between the
employee and the employer. Equally, the terms may be subject to the country’s labor laws. Here, employers should
note that India’s labor laws supersede the provisions of labor contracts—any termination policy or clause outlined
within a contract should be checked against the law by a professional.

In the case that there is no labor contract, or the labor contract does not define a method of termination, then the
employer has to follow the state law. In this scenario, an employer needs to abide by India’s distinct, state-specific
labor legislation in order to terminate the employee.

In cases where there is no labor contract, or the labor contract does not define a method of termination, the matter
comes under the jurisdiction of the specific state’s labor legislation. This is because Indian federal law does not
explicitly require that employment contracts be in written form.

The new labor codes, which are yet to be notified soon by the federal government, further make the termination
process more flexible for the employers.

Types of employees and employers recognized in India

Indian law mainly recognizes two types of employers and two types of employees.

The types of employers include:

Establishments– This term takes all kinds of employers under its umbrella.
Factories– This term specifically refers to employers in the manufacturing sector.

Types of employees include:

Employees– A term which refers to all employees in any kind of job position
Workmen– This term was defined in 1947. Employees who are not employed in administrative, supervisory, or
managerial roles are termed as workmen.

Types of termination of employment

Voluntary termination
Voluntary termination means that an employee voluntarily terminates his/her employment with a company. This
might involve personal reasons on behalf of an employee, such as getting a new and better job, resigning from a
field, or starting up their own venture. This might also be due to professional reasons, as a result of constructive
dismissal. Constructive dismissal refers to a situation where an employee is dissatisfied with his/her workplace.
They may be facing harassment, low wages, long work hours, long commute, etc.

Forced discharge of employees from an organization also falls under construction dismissal. An employee facing a
forced discharge may be eligible for some form of unemployment benefits. Voluntary termination requires an
employee to hand in a formal letter of resignation to the employer. The standard notice period is 30 days. But this
term may be shorter depending upon the organization.

Involuntary termination
Involuntary termination is when an employee is made to leave an organization against their own free will. A
company may opt for involuntary termination during layoffs, firing employees, downsizing, etc.

Layoffs and downsizing

Layoffs and Downsizing refer to a company reducing its workforce. Employees who are downsized are usually let
go without their own fault. Companies downsize to save costs and restructure their workforce. Downsizing is
common when a company is bankrupt or goes for a merger. Layoffs may also happen because an employee’s skill
set is no longer useful for a company in the present day.

Getting fired
Employees may be fired from their jobs due to unsatisfactory work performance, or because their behaviors and
attitudes cause trouble at the workplace. In many countries, including India, an employee who is fired for
misconduct need not be given a 30-day notice. Employees that are fired for violating company policies must be
given a chance to explain themselves before they are fired.

Illegal dismissals
An employer is in complete charge of hiring and firing people in his/her organization. However, an employer cannot
fire an employee without sufficient cause or reason. Terminating an employee based on caste, race, color, gender,
etc. are illegal causes of termination in many countries. An employee who has taken maternity leave or a leave of
absence, or has reported wrongdoings in an organization cannot be fired on these grounds.

If one’s company is found guilty of wrongfully terminating employees, you would be liable to compensate them and
restore their job positions or offer similar ones. Companies might also be penalized if found guilty of wrongful
termination.

Termination under contract

In most cases, employment contracts are very specific about the process for terminating employment. This is mostly
the case when the termination is by mutual agreement, and in particular cases where contractual employment is set
for a fixed period. For instance, consultants with international organizations or interns at private organizations, often
have defined employment periods.

An employee is considered terminated at the conclusion of such a contract, unless a new contract is offered or the
clauses in the initial contract are amended. As in most countries, employees that are terminated by employers are
often given one month notice or payment of one month of wages in lieu thereof.

Termination by law
As previously mentioned, any termination needs to comply with federal and state law because these laws supersede
contract provisions. However, state law becomes particularly important when no defined procedure for termination
exists. In such scenarios, state law becomes the rule of thumb for terminating an employee. State law itself is
dependent on the area of operations of the employer.

Labor legislation governing termination of employees in Indian states

In the following section, we examine state laws for termination in several prominent investment destinations in
India.
State labor law in Delhi Union Territory
Under The Delhi Shops and Establishments Act of 1954, an employer cannot terminate an employee who has been
with the corporation for more than three months without giving the employee at least 30 days of notice or a salary in
lieu of such notice. The employer need not give notice if misconduct is the cause for termination. However, the
employee, in such circumstances, should have an opportunity to reasonably explain the charge against them prior to
termination.

State labor law in Maharashtra

Under the Maharashtra Shops and Establishments Act, an employer cannot terminate an employee who has been
with the company for more than a year without giving the employee at least 30 days of notice in writing. If an
employee has been with the company for more than three months but less than a year, the employer needs to give at
least 14 days of notice. The notice is not necessary if the employee is being terminated for misconduct.

State labor law in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu

Under The Karnataka Shops and Establishments Act, 1961 and the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act,
1947, an employer cannot terminate an employee that has been with the enterprise for more than six months, except
for a ‘reasonable cause’. In addition, an employer must provide a one-month notice. If misconduct is the cause for
termination, no notice or associated payoff is required.

State Labor Law in Andhra Pradesh

According to the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Act, 1988, The notice period of an employee who has
given the service of at least 6 months, there would be no notice period. The employee has the right to tell and
explain the Separation in the notice of Resignation letter.

State Labor Law in West Bengal

The employer shall give a notice period to the employee of 30 days according to the law. Even if there is no
employee eligible for gratuity payment, the Act is still applicable to the establishment. This can take place within 30
days of termination.

State Labor Law in Rajasthan

According to the Rajasthan Shops & Commercial Establishments Act, 1958 no employee how has been in
continuous employment for a period of fewer than 6 months can leave the organization without giving him a
month’s notice period.

Rules governing termination of employees in India

The employee termination decision most probably falls under one of the reasons described above. Whatever the
cause of firing the employees, certain federal and central rules must be followed by every organization. Here are the
6 important rules that one must abide by before terminating one’s employees.

A 30-to-90-day notice period is standard for terminating the workforce in one’s organization. Stated under the
Industrial Disputes Act of 1947, the law mandates that when terminating more than 100 members working in a
manufacturing plant, mine or plantation unit, government approval is required. Terminating employees in other
sectors requires only a government notification.
Under the Indian labor laws, an employee can be lawfully terminated from an organization for one of the following
reasons:

● Disobedience or will full insubordination

● Fraud, dishonesty, or theft
● Loss or Damage to the employer’s goods willfully.
● Taking bribes or illegal gratifications.
● Absence without applying for leave for more than 10 days.
● Late attendance.
● Disorderly behavior during work.
● Negligence of work.

When organizations terminate their workforce for convenience, the policy regulates that the last person to join the
organization must be the first one to leave. Also, when the organization rehires for the same or similar job roles, the
terminated workforce should be prioritized.

When an organization fires an employee for convenience who is pregnant or seeking maternity leave, they run the
risk of non-compliance with the Maternity Benefit Act of 2017 in the Indian constitution.

Non-solicitation clauses can be used in a limited fashion, whereas non-compete agreements cannot be enforced
according to Indian law.

Most states in India have laws that allow for up to 10-15 days of paid leave in a year. In addition, employees can get
up to 10 days of sick leave, and another 10 days of casual leave. Employees seeking leave under these criteria
cannot be considered terminated.

HR checklist for employee termination

Here’s a quick checklist that outlines some of the procedures that one must follow when terminating employees.

Consult the company’s HR policies

Before serving a notice of termination to any employee, one must take a look at one’s company’s HR rules and
policies. Every company has a specific set of procedures for dealing with different scenarios.

Refer to the employee agreement

The employee agreement will contain provisions relating to the notice period, severance pay, compensation and so
on that must be offered to the employee upon termination. This agreement is often signed at the beginning, and it
serves as an important reference that holds up in a court of law.

Serve a notice
Serving a notice is a crucial part of employee termination. The severance notice must be given 30 to 90 days before
termination. This notice must be given in writing, stating a clear reason as to why the employee is being terminated.
Settle the severance pay
Severance pay is offered to employees who retire, are laid off, or reach the end of the contractual agreements. One
month’s salary must be paid to employees who have worked for a year or more. For mass termination in protected
sectors, 3 months of wages must be offered to employees. Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 entitles employees to
gratuity payment after five years of continuous service.

The Industrial disputes Act of 1972, also states that retrenched ( involuntarily dismissed) workmen must be given 15
days of severance pay for each year of service that they have completed.

Conduct an exit interview

Exit interviews help an organization to gain feedback and evaluate their work culture, environment, ethics etc. It
also helps organizations to narrow down their areas of improvement when it comes to enhancing employee
experience in the office.

Employee protection and court jurisdiction in case of disputes

An employee who has been dismissed has a legal right to appeal to his/her jurisdictional authority. The employee
could appeal to a court for one of the following reasons-

● The employer has terminated an employee without stating a specific reason.

● The employee has not been proven to be guilty of misconduct and pleads innocence.
● The employee feels that their dismissal was based on unfair grounds.

When an employee seeks redressal of any of the following grievances, they have to first establish a case and seek the
approval of their local labor authorities. Once the approval is granted, the case may be overseen by jurisdictional
conciliation officers, industrial tribunals or labor courts. The Indian Industrial Act of 1947 seeks to address
grievances for workmen in an industrial workforce.

Most workforce disputes in India take anywhere between six months to two years to get resolved.

Protections that employees have against dismissal

All dismissals on grounds of misconduct must be superseded by a domestic inquiry conducted in accordance with
the principles of natural justice. The employee must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard as part of the
enquiry process. If the services of a workman (who has completed continuous service of at least one year) are
terminated on grounds other than misconduct, in addition to Notice of Retrenchment, the employer is also required
to serve notice to the appropriate government. Further, retrenchment compensation equal to 15 days average pay for
each completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months (Retrenchment
Compensation) shall be payable to the workmen.

Compliance with Maternity Benefits Act

In addition to the protection afforded by the Industrial Disputes Act to workmen, the Maternity Benefits Act also
prohibits dismissal or discharge of women during their maternity leave.

Additional obligations for employers

An employer with a workmen headcount of more than 100 is required to obtain prior permission of the appropriate
government for dismissing workmen. Further, workmen shall be entitled to three months’ notice (or salary in lieu of
notice) along with Retrenchment Compensation. Further, the employer shall ordinarily be required to retrench the
workman who was the last person to be employed in a particular category.

Impact on employers
Wrongful termination, or not following due process as defined by the respective state laws, will result in legal
punitive consequences for the employer. In addition, the courts may order the employer to pay fines and award
additional compensation to an employee that was terminated.

Employers that review labor laws and, explicitly, state procedures for terminating employees in their contracts,
significantly reduce the potential for labor disputes related to the termination of an employee.

Beyond this, however, employers must ensure that management teams and HR professionals are fully briefed on
termination procedures. Contracts can protect employers; yet, management teams and HR professionals must ensure
labor law compliance to protect them from any adverse litigation.

Suspension or dismissal for misconduct, and acts or omissions which constitute misconduct-

Suspension of an employee means keeping an employee away from work-place temporarily for reasons of
discipline. However, the suspension does not mean removal from service of employment. The suspension of an
employee will be based on the grounds of misconduct, violation of rules of the company, causing damage to the
property of the company etc. During the suspension period, the employee cannot perform duty till the claim is
resolved. There are lot of differences between “suspension” and “dismissal” where the suspension is temporary and
dismissal is permanent decision either by rule of the employer or by law. We will have a look at the suspension of an
employee in detail.

Conditions on Suspending an employee

The suspension of an employee can be performed under the following conditions:

Suspension Pending Domestic Enquiry

If an employee has committed misconduct inside the work premises, then such employee will be suspended
immediately under pending investigations. This is called Suspension Pending Enquiry. The suspension order will be
issued along with charge-sheet, the charge-sheet must follow within 7 days of issue of the suspension order.

Suspension Pending Court’s Order

If the employee has accused in a court of law for any criminal offence, the concerned authority is liable to suspend
an employee under suspension pending court’s order.

Suspension as Punishment
Even though an employee is not suspended under pending enquiry, if it is decided to suspend an employee for the
misconduct committed by the employee, the concerned authority may do so after the conclusion of the enquiry. In
such cases, the suspended employee will not be allowed to receive any payment during the suspension.
Right to Suspend an Employee
The right to suspend an employee during the pendency of an enquiry against the employee are regulated under the
provisions regulating the conditions of service. During the suspension, an employee is only prevented from
discharging the duties of his office for the time being.

Note: If the rules are framed by the employer in-specific for not to pay during the suspension, the employer cannot
claim the same.

Suspension Allowance
During the suspension, the service of an employee is not permanently deprived. The employee still continues to be a
member of the service in spite of the order of suspension. Further, during the period of his suspension, the employee
is paid with allowance known as “suspension allowance” or subsistence allowance. The suspension allowance which
will be normally less than the salary of an employee.

However, there is a provision of Section 10A of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, for payment of
subsistence allowance during the term of suspension against the pending enquiry. Therefore, under Section 10A, the
employer is liable to pay subsistence allowance during the term of suspension against pending enquiry. If the
misconduct is proved after the enquiry, the employee is terminated and not entitled to any wages for the suspension
period. But, if the enquiry results in reinstatement, then the employee would be entitled to receive full wages (Pay +
allowances) for the suspension period.

Note: This is applicable even when the employer decides to give lesser punishment to the employee which means
the reinstatement or punishment will be beneficial to the employee.

Payment of Suspension Allowance

The employer suspends an employee against pending investigation or enquiry into complaints or charges of
misconduct against the employee in such case the employer should pay suspension allowance to such employee
under the following conditions:

● For the first ninety days of suspension, the employee will be provided with the wages at the rate of 50% of
such wages.
● For the remaining period of suspension or in case of any delay in the completion of any proceedings against
such employee, the wages at the rate of 75% of the total wages will be provided.
In case of any discrepancy regarding the suspension allowance payable to an employee, the employer or the
employee would refer the dispute to the Labour Court. The Labour Court after hearing may decide the dispute and
such decision will be final and binding on the parties.

If any provisions not discussed here and if better allowance or law is followed in any part of the country, the same
can be adopted by the employer and employees.

Suspension Allowances Includes all Compensatory Allowance

As per Rule 5 of the Model Standing Orders states that suspension allowance should be equal to one-half of the
basic salary, dearness allowance and other compensatory allowances. On the other hand, the service charges to a
suspended employee of a hotel will be included in the compensatory allowance for calculating subsistence
allowance, which has to be paid to an employee.

Recovery of money due from an Employer

In case of any amount is due to an employee from an employer, the employee can make an application to the
Government for recovery of the due amount. The Government if satisfied after verification of the application, will
issue a certificate for that due amount to the collector who proceeds to recover the same.
Note: Every application should be made within a year from the date on which the amount became payable to the
employee from the employer. If the application is made after the expiry of the above period, the Government may
approve the application after knowing the reason and satisfied for not making the application within the prescribed
period.

Means of redress for workers against unfair treatment or wrongful executions by the employer or his agents
or servants.