Page |0

A
RESEARCH PROJECT
ON
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ID ACT 1947 AND ITS AMENDMENT 2010

SUBMITTED TO:

BHILAI STEEL PLANT

LAW DEPARTMENT
BHILAI

SUBMITTED BY:
AMAN MUNDARI
B.B.A. L.L.B(H), SEM VII, 4th Year
AMITY UNIVERSITY CHHATTISGARH,
RAIPUR.
 Page |1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Every project big or small is successful largely due to the effort of a

number of wonderful people who have always given their valuable advice
or lent a helping hand. I sincerely appreciate the inspiration; support and
guidance of all those people who have been instrumental in making this
project a success.
I am extremely grateful to “SAIL, BSP” for the confidence bestowed in me
and entrusting my project entitled “Critical analysis of Industrial
Dispute Act 1947 and its Amendment 2010”.
At this juncture, I feel deeply honoured in expressing my sincere thanks
to Shri P.S. Ravi Shankar, DGM (Law), Mrs. Aditi Satpathy, AM (Coordn)
for making the resources available at right time and providing valuable
insights leading to the successful completion of my project
I would also like to thank Pratik Sir for providing all necessary documents
and other resources necessary for the completion of the work assigned.
Last but not the least I place a deep sense of gratitude to my family
members and my friends who have been a constant source of inspiration
during the preparation of this project work.
 Page |2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. History of the Industrial Dispute…………………………………………………….3

2. Industrial Dispute ……………………………….…………………………………………4
3. Definition………………………………………………………………………………………6
4. Authorities Under the Act……………………………………………………………..8
5. Constitutional Validity of the Act…………………………………………………..8
6. Dispute Resolution in Indian Context……………………………………………10
7. Procedure for Settlement of Industrial Dispute……………………………14
8. Case Study…………………………………………………………………………………..17
9. Amendment of Industrial Dispute……………………………………………….21
10. Comparative study of Pre-Amendment and
Post-Amendment……………………………………………………………….24
11. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….28
 Page |3

Introduction

History of Industrial Dispute

The history of Industrial Dispute can be traced from the year 1890. The earliest legislation in
India was Bengal Regulation VII of 1819. Under this legislation, the breach of contract was treated
as a criminal offence and this was also followed by the Merchant Shipping Act (I of 1859) and the
Workmen’s Breach of Contract Act, 1860. However, the development and growth of central
legislative measures to govern industrial legislation in India can be examined and studied from
employers and Workmen’s Dispute Act, 1860 to the present Industrial Dispute Act,1947 which is
being followed now. There were workmen in Bombay Presidency relating to the failure and delay
in payment of wages. In this connection on the request of the Bombay Government, the
Government of India enacted the Employers and workmen’s (Disputes) Act 1860. The Trade
Dispute Act 1929 was codified for five years as an experimental measure. The Act was amended
in 1932 and was made permanent by the Trade Disputes (Extending) Act, 1934. The Trade Dispute
Act had various defects. The major defects were the restraints that have been imposed on strike
and lockouts and no provisions had been given for the proceedings under the Act for the purpose
of settlement of Industrial dispute either by reference to the Board of conciliation or the court of
inquiry. Hence, the Industrial Dispute bill was introduced in 1946 and was published in Gazette of
India Part V pp.33-35. Later this bill was amended as Industrial Dispute Bill 1947 and was passed
as it received the assent and came into the statute book on 11TH March 1947 which came into force
on 1-4-1947.

The Industrial Dispute Act 1947

The Industrial Dispute Act 1947 basically deals with the prevention and settlement of Industrial
Disputes and also to safeguard the interest of the workers. The various authorities that are covered
under the Industrial Dispute Act 1947 are Conciliation officers, Court of Inquiries, Boards, Courts
and Tribunals. The duties of these authorities are the prohibition of strikes and lockouts, penalties
for the contravention of the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947. This Act contains 40
 Page |4

sections divided into 7 chapters. Chapter 1 deals with title, definitions, etc. Chapter II deals with
authorities under ID Act 1947. Chapter III deals with reference of disputes to Boards, Courts or
Tribunals. Chapter IV deals with Procedure, Power and duties of Authorities. Chapter V deals with
Strikes and Lockouts. Chapter VI deals with Penalties. Chapter VII deals with Miscellaneous.

What is Industrial Dispute?

The term Industrial Dispute has been defined under section 2(k) of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947
as “any dispute or difference between employers and employees or between employers and
workmen or between workmen and workmen which is connected with the employment or non –
employment or the terms and conditions of employment of any person”. An ‘industrial dispute’
must necessarily be a dispute in an industry.

Types of Industrial Dispute

1. Interest Dispute
2. Grievance Dispute
3. Recognition Dispute
4. Unfair Labour Practices

1. Interest Dispute- These disputes are also called ‘economic disputes’. Such types of
disputes arising out of terms and conditions of employment either out of the claims made
by the employees or offers given by the employers. Such demands or offers are generally
made with a view to arrive at a collective agreement. Example of interest disputes are lay-
offs, claim for wages and bonus, job security, fringe benefits, etc.
2. Grievance or Right Disputes- The grievance or right disputes arise out of application or
interpretation of existing agreements or contracts between the employees and the
management. They relate either to an individual worker or a group of workers in the same
group. That’s why in some countries; such disputes are also called ‘individual disputes’.
Payment of wages and other fringe benefits, working time, over-time, seniority,
promotion, demotion, dismissal, discipline, transfer, etc. are examples of grievance or right
disputes. If these grievances are not settled as per the procedure laid down for this purpose,
 Page |5

these then result in embitterment of the working relationship and a climate for industrial
strike and unrest. Such grievances are often settled through laid down standard procedures
like the provisions of the collective agreement, employment contract, works rule or law, or
customs/usage in this regard. Besides, Labour Courts or Tribunals also adjudicate over
grievance or interest disputes.
3. Recognition Disputes arises when the management of an organization refuses to recognize
a trade union for the purpose of collective bargaining or to represent its member’s
employees in case of a conflict or dispute. When the management dislike a particular union,
it refuses to accept that trade union for the purpose of negotiations or bargaining and then
it becomes a case of trade union victimization. This also happens when there is an already
existing trade union or it is a case of multiple trade unions and each making a claim for
recognition. Recognition Disputes also arises when a particular trade union does not have
sufficient representatives. Recognition disputes are settled through the guidelines given by
the government for recognition of trade union or with the help of Code of Discipline which
has been voluntarily laid down by the government.
4. Unfair labour Practices- it includes pressure on employees when they exercise their rights
to organize, take part in union activity, refusal to bargain, recruiting new employees during
a strike which is not illegal, creating an environment or actually creating an act of force or
violence or stop communication etc. Such disputes can be settled through conciliation or
such disputes are settled according to the normal procedure laid down under the Industrial
Disputes Act 1947.

Applicability of the Act

The Industrial Dispute Act is extends to whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir and applies to
every industrial establishment carrying on any business, trade, manufacture or distribution of
goods and services irrespective of the number of workmen employed. Every person employed in
an establishment for hire or reward including contract labour, apprentices and part-time employees
to do any manual, clerical, skilled, unskilled, technical, operational or supervisory work. This act
is not applicable to a person acting as managerial or administrative capacity.
 Page |6

Definitions of the given terms:

 appropriate government- Sec. 2(a) defines appropriate government as “major port, the
Central Government, and the words ‘major port, any company in which not less than fifty-
one per cent. of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central Government, or any
corporation, not being a corporation referred to in this clause, established by or under any
law made by Parliament, or the Central public sector undertaking, subsidiary companies
set up by the principal undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the
Central Government, and’ shall be substituted; (ii) in relation to any other industrial
dispute, including the State public sector undertaking, subsidiary companies set up by the
principal undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the State
Government, the State government:
 Award S.2 (b) - an interim or a final determination of an industrial dispute or of any
question relating thereto by any Labour Court, Industrial Tribunal or National Industrial
Tribunal and includes an arbitrator award made under section10A.
 Board S.2 (c) - a board of Conciliation constituted under this Act.
 Closure S.2 (cc)- the permanent closing down of a place of employment or part thereof;
 Conciliation office S.2 (d) – a conciliation officer appointed under this Act.
 Court S.2 (f)- a court of Inquiry constituted under this Act;
 Employer S.2 (g)- (i) in relation to an industry carried on or by or under the authority of
any department of the Central Government or a State Government the authority prescribed
in this behalf, or where no authority is prescribed, the head of the department; (ii) In relation
to an industry carried on by or on behalf of a local authority, the chief executive officer of
that authority.
 Industry S.2 (j)- any business, trade, undertaking, manufacturing or calling of employers
and includes any calling, service, employment, handicraft, or industrial occupation or a
vocation of workmen.
 Industrial Disputes S.2(k)- any dispute or difference between employers and employers,
or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is
connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with
the conditions of labour, of any person.
 Page |7

 Labour Court S.2 (kkb)- a Labour court constituted under section 7.

 Lay-off S.2 (kkk)- 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 break-down 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.
 Lock out S.2(l) – 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.
 Retrenchment S.2 (oo)- 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 (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. (c) termination
of the service of a workman on the ground of continued ill-health.
 Workman S.2(s) – any person including 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 expressed or implied and for the purposes of
any proceeding under this Act in relation to an industrial dispute, includes any such person
who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched 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 (i) who is subject to the Air Force Act, 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. (iii) who is employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity.
 Page |8

Authorities under the Act

Works committee - It is a bipartite forum having representatives from employer & workmen side
in equal number ranging from 12 to 20 in total.

Conciliation Officer – The appropriate Govt. may appoint Conciliation Officers charged with the
duty of mediating in and promoting the settlement of industrial disputes.

Board of Conciliation – The appropriate Govt. by notification in official Gazette constitutes a

Board of Conciliation for promoting the settlement of an industrial dispute. A board should consist
of a chairman and two or four other members, as the appropriate Govt. thinks fit.

Labour Court – The appropriate government may constitute one or more labour courts for the
adjudication of an industrial dispute. A labour court shall consist of one person only with necessary
judicial qualification, to be appointed by the appropriate Government.

Tribunals – The appropriate Govt. may constitute one or more Industrial Tribunals for the
adjudication of an industrial dispute relating to any matter, whether specified, in the second or
third schedule and for performing such other functions as may be assigned to them.

Arbitrator – Voluntary reference of the dispute to the arbitrator for adjudication under an
agreement. Publication of arbitration agreement in official gazette is mandatory.

Constitutional Validity of the Industrial Dispute Act.

The Constitutional validity of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947 was challenged in the case of Niemla
Textile Finishing. Mills Ltd. v. The 2nd Punjab National Industrial Tribunal 1957 AIR 329. In this
case, it was contended the reference to the Tribunal was bad because of the following reasons; (1)
the act was ultra vires the Constitution inasmuch as its provisions are, violative of the fundamental
rights enshrined in Art. 14 and Art. 19 (1) (f) and (g) of the constitution, (2) the Industrial Tribunals
are legislating in the guise of adjudication, and this amounts to delegation of the powers of
legislation which it was not competent to the Central Legislature to do so, and (3) the definition of
the term “industry”. comprises industrial as well as non- industrial concerns and, therefore, the Act
 Page |9

was not within the legislative competence of the Central Legislature under Entry 27 and 29 of List
III of the Seventh- Schedule to the Government of India Act, 1935.

It was held that: (1) The Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, is not unconstitutional and the provisions of
the Act do not contravene Arts. 14 and 19 (1) (f) and (g) of the Constitution. The basic idea
underlying all the provisions of the Act is the settlement of industrial disputes and the promotion
of industrial peace so that production may not be interrupted and the community, in general, may
be benefited, and the appropriate government has, therefore, a discretion in the matter of making
the reference to one or other of the Authorities under the Act and also in the matter of carrying out
the, various provisions of the Act, including the curtailment or extension of the period of
preparation of the award of the Tribunal, having regard to the exigencies of the situation and the
objects to be achieved. (2) Industrial Tribunals while settling particular industrial disputes referred
to them, lay down certain general principles to be observed in regard to the determination of bonus,
reinstatement of dismissed or discharged employee and other allied topics mainly with the object
of promoting industrial peace, but these principles or rules of conduct, though they are applied as
precedents by the Industrial Tribunals while adjudicating upon other similar industrial disputes
referred to them, are not rules of law and do not amount to legislation. (3) The act is not ultra vires
the legislature, as the Central Legislature under Entries 27 and 29 of List III of the Seventh
Schedule to the Government of India Act, 1935.
 P a g e | 10

II

Dispute resolution in Indian context

In India, since the disputes are resolved under the ID Act, the emergence of the non-union firms
would have no effect on the dispute resolution framework of conciliation, arbitration and
adjudication in some cases. Under section – 2A of the ID Act, “Where any dispute or difference
between that workman and his employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge,
dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute” The fact that
the fairness perceptions may stem from all three kinds of justice that constitute organizational
justice; distributive justice which focuses on the fairness of distribution of outcomes, procedural
justice, which is concerned about the fairness of the process by which outcomes are distributed
and interactional justice that deals with the fairness of interpersonal interactions and
communications.

The objects of the Industrial Dispute Resolution Mechanism are:

1. To examine the types of industrial disputes in India;

2. To analyze the dominating causes of Industrial disputes;
3. To provide for the prevention of industrial disputes through works committees;
4. To provide for investigating the industrial disputes through a court of Inquiry;
5. To provide for the settlement of industrial disputes through a three-tier system of Labour
Courts, Industrial Tribunals and National Tribunals;
6. To study the management attitude towards labour to impose a prohibition on
commencement or continuation of strike and lock out during a specified period;
7. To provide for payment of compensation in case of lay-off, Retrenchment and Closure;
8. To define and prohibit unfair labour practices.
9. Offering suggestions and implications for improvement.

Causes Consequences and Settlement of Industrial Disputes

Industrial Disputes Act provides for machinery for just and equitable settlement of Industrial
dispute by adjudication, negotiation and conciliation. It promotes measures for securing and
 P a g e | 11

preserving amity and good relations between employer and workmen. It helps the preservation of
illegal strikes and lockouts and provides provision for relief to workmen in the case of layoff and
retrenchment. It promotes a base or collective bargaining also.

Causes of Industrial Disputes

The problem of industrial unrest is inherent in the industrial system. The main features of industrial
work anywhere are that (a) it involves the division of labour; (b) it is a group activity; (c) it is
carried under control. The causes of industrial disputes can be classified as 1. Economic causes 2.
Management causes 3. Political causes.

1. Economic Causes

Economic causes include questions pertaining to wages, bonus and allowances, retrenchment of
workmen by the employer rationalization and automation, faulty retrenchment system, leaves and
so on. Low wages, irrespective of rising prices, demand for a rise in D.A, intolerable working and
living conditions, issues pertaining to an hour of work, etc. are some other economic causes that
provoked a number of strikes in India. The worker factors responsible for industrial unrest have
been: (1) Inter-union rivalries (2) Economic and political environment that exercises adverse
effects on workers attitudes and (3) Indiscipline amongst workers.

2. Managerial Causes

Some of the causes of discontent are inherent in the industrial system, itself such as:
(1) Workers do not get any opportunity for self- expression; or (2) Their social needs are not
fulfilled; that is the position of workers within informal groups formed in industrial undertaking
and problems of conflict within the groups may not be taken into account. (3) Lack of
communication on one hand, between the workers and management, may turn petty quarrels into
industrial unrest and on the other; the problem of discipline in industrial units assume serious
dimensions. The other managerial factors responsible for industrial unrest have been as

1. Mental inertia on the part of management and labour.

2. Management’s general attitude of hatred towards their workers.
3. Lack of competence on the supervisor and other managers in human relations.
 P a g e | 12

4. Management’s desire to pay a comparatively lesser amount of bonus or dearness allowance

against the desire of workmen.
5. Efforts to introduce modernization without prior or appropriate environment.
6. Excessive work load and inadequate welfare facilities.
7. The defective policy of lay-off.
8. Denial of the workers right to recognize union.
9. Unfair practices like victimization or termination of services without assigning any
reasons.
10. Lack of definite wage policy and stabilization of prices.
11. Lack of a proper policy of union recognition. Denial of worker’s right to organize.

3. Political Causes

Industrial disputes are partly political also. Some important strikes I organized by industrial
workers in India. Prior to independence, as early, there was a mass strike in Mumbai against the
sentence of imprisonment strikes occurred on account of actions taken against, for participating in
demonstrations, the trial of political leaders, etc. After the independence also, some strikes have
occurred owing to agitations of political parties on questions like re-organisation action of States,
National Language, etc. Percentage distribution of industrial disputes by causes as published by
the Ministry of Labour.

Consequences of Industrial Disputes

Industrial law is no exception to the shifting emphasis of modern law towards statutory law. The
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is, therefore, the matrix, the charter, as it were, to the industrial law.
This Act and other analogous State statutes provide the machinery for regulating the rights of the
employers and employees to lock-outs and strikes and foster investigation and settlement of
industrial disputes in peaceful and harmonious atmosphere by providing scope for collective
bargaining by negotiations and mediation and, failing that, by voluntary arbitration or compulsory
adjudication by the authorities created under these statutes with the active participation of the
unions.

The consequences of Industrial disputes are many, a brief description is given.

 P a g e | 13

(1) Disturb the economic, social and political life of a country: When labour and equipment in
the whole or any part of an industry are rendered idle by strike or lockout, national dividend
suffers in a way that injures economic welfare.
(2) Decline in the demand for goods and services: Strikes reduces the demand for the goods
that other industries make, if the industry in which stoppage has occurred is one that
furnishes raw materials semi-finished goods or services largely used in the products of
other industries.
(3) Lasting loss to the workers: There is a lasting injury to the workers in the form of work
being interrupted due to the strikes which involves a loss of time which cannot be replaced.
The wages are lost and the workers can least afford to lose them especially when the
average earning of a worker is not very high.
(4) Increase in indebtness: This increases the indebtness among the workers and not only the
old debts become heavier but fresh debts may also incurred.
(5) Loss of health of family members: The workers and their members also suffer from loss of
health due to mental barriers resulting from loss of wages.
(6) Problem to consumers: Strikes and lockouts create problem to consumers also Articles of
their requirements are not available in time, and the prices of such articles reach high due
to black marketing activities.
(7) Loss to the management/employer: When workers stop working, the plant and machinery
remain idle. The fixed express are to borne by the employer even when the production
stops. This way the employer suffers from great loss.
(8) Bad effect on labour relations: Strikes and lockouts bring bad effects on industrial realtions.
With the result the workmen and the employer always be in mental tension.

Obstruction to economic growth: Strikes creates many kinds of violence which obstruct the
growth of economy.
 P a g e | 14

Procedure for Settlement of Industrial Disputes

The Industrial Disputes Act 1947 provides procedure for the settlement of industrial disputes,
which must be followed in all PUC(Public Utility Service) which has been defined in Section 2
(n) of the Act which includes “any railway, postal, telegraph or telephone service that supplies
power, water and light to the public, any system of public conservancy or situation, any section of
an industrial establishment on the working of which the safety of the establishment or the workmen
employed therein depends and any industry which keeping in view the public emergency has been
declared as such by the appropriate Government”

Conciliation

As laid down in the Act a dispute should first go to through the process of conciliation before it
could be referred to the appropriate authorities for adjudication. Where any industrial dispute exists
or is apprehended, the Conciliation Officer may or where the dispute relates to public utility service
and a notice under Section 22 has been given shall hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed
manner.

Conciliation proceedings are deemed to have been started from the date on which a notice issued
to the parties to appear before the conciliation officer who may meet them jointly or separately.
The conciliation officer must submit his report to the Government within 14 days of the starting
of conciliation proceedings.

During this period he tries to bring about a fair and amicable between the parties to the dispute. If
a settlement arrived at, the conciliation Officers will send a report to the Government along with a
memorandum of settlement duly signed by both parties. If no settlement is reached by the parties,
the conciliation officer will submit his report to the appropriate government stating the reasons for
which he thinks no settlement could be arrived at as well as the facts of the case.

Action by the Government

On receipt of the report from the Conciliation Officer, the Government will come to a decision on
whether the circumstances and the facts of the case as such to justify a further reference. The
Government has to arrive at prima facie, conclusion that the nature of the dispute justifies a further
 P a g e | 15

reference. If in the opinion of the Government there is a scope of arriving at a settlement by further
conciliation efforts it may refer the case to the Board of Conciliation.

Collective Bargaining

Collective bargaining as such is one of the most developed in Indian history since independence
and deserves the attention of all who are concerned with the preservation of industrial peace and
implement of industrial productivity. In the laissez faire the employers enjoyed unfettered rights
to hire and fire. In United States of America the workers have the right to organize and bargain
collectively. In Japan the right to collective bargaining is guaranteed under their Constitution.

Collective bargaining in India is of late development and therefore in view of the above
circumstances, the legislature in order to establish and maintain harmony and peace between
labour and capital came out with a legislation named the Industrial Dispute Act 1947 which
provides the machinery for the settlement of industrial dispute. This Act has two main objects, first
is the investigation and the second is the settlement. There are some routine criticism of the
adjudicatory system i.e. delay, expensive governmental interference in referrals and uncertain
outcome. Therefore the parties to the industrial dispute are coming closure to the idea that direct
negotiation provide better approach to resolving key deference over wages and other conditions of
employment.

Grievance Redressal Machinery

A new chapter IIB had been inserted by the Industrial Dispute Amendment Act 2010 which present
section 9-C that has been substituted and enforced with effect from 15th September 2010.

(1)Every industrial establishment employing twenty or more workmen shall have one or more
Grievance Redressal Committee for the resolution of disputes which arise out of individual
grievances.

(2)The Grievance Redressal Committee shall consist of an equal number of members from the
employer and the workmen.

(3)The Chairperson of the Grievance Redressal Committee shall be selected from the employer
and from among the workmen alternatively on a rotational basis every year.
 P a g e | 16

(4)The total number of members of the Grievance Redressal Committee shall not exceed more
than six.

Provided: that there shall be, as far as practicable, one women member if the Grievance Redressal
Committee has two members and in case the number of members are more than two, the number
of women members may be increased proportionately.

(5)Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the setting up of Grievance Redressal

Committee shall not affect the right of the workman to raise an industrial dispute on the same
matter under the provisions of this Act.

(6)The Grievance Redressal Committee may complete its proceedings within thirty days on receipt
of a written application by or on behalf of the aggrieved party.

(7)The workman who is aggrieved of the decision of the Grievance Redressal Committee may
prefer an appeal to the employer against the decision of the Grievance Redressal Committee and
the employer shall, within one month from the date of receipt of such appeal, dispose of the same
and send a copy of his decision to the workman concerned.

(8)Nothing contained in this section shall apply to the workmen for whom there is an established
Grievance Redressal Mechanism in the establishment concerned.

Reference of Dispute for Adjudication

If a dispute is not settled by negotiations or conciliation and the parties are not interested for
voluntary arbitration, the government may at its own discretion or on an application made by the
parties to the dispute representing the majority, separately or jointly, refer the dispute to the Labour
Court or Industrial tribunal for adjudication as per Section – 10(c) / 10(d) as the case may be. An
order of reference shall specify the period within which the award is to be submitted to the
Government. The award received from the Labour Court / Tribunal shall then be published by the
government in the Official Gazette as stipulated under Section 17(1) and will come into force on
the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication. The Award shall be binding on both the
employer and the employees. The award of the Labour Court or Tribunal shall be final and not
applicable. However, a writ petition before the High Court and thereafter an appeal before the
 P a g e | 17

Supreme Court can be filled. The labour Commissioner directly deals with disposing applications
received from the management of industrial establishments seeking permission for closure and for
lay-off and retrenchment of workers.

Industrial Dispute Cases in Bhilai Steel Plant

1. In D. Venkatesh Vs. Bhilai Steel Plant before the CGIT – cum Labour court, Jabapur.

The President of Metal Mines Worker’s Union, Dalli – Rajhara raised an Industrial Dispute before
Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Raipur regarding premature superannuation of Shri D.
Venkatesh, P. No.078216, Ex- Sr. Bus Driver, Rajhara Mines of Bhilai Steel Plant and on failure
of conciliation, the reference was made to CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur under Section-10
(1) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 for adjudication of the dispute as to “ whether the demands
of Shri D. Venkatesh, P.No. 078216, Ex- Sr. Bus Driver, Rajhara Mines of Bhilai Steel Plant for
reckoning his date of birth as 24.03.1946 instead of 02.06.1938 and consequently reinstating him
in services with full back wages is legal & justified? If yes, to what relief he is entitled?”

1st party/workman has claimed that:-

1. His date of birth has recorded in Form B register as 24.03.1946.

2. His PF nomination containing the date of birth as 24.03.1946.
3. The age certificate issued by medical officer on 08.04.1994 declaring his as a 48 years.

2nd party management has opposed the claim by filing a written statement that the dispute raised
by workman for correction of date of birth is highly belated and not tenable. Workman had filed
civil suit No. 6A/97 before Civil Judge, Class-2, Rajhara and the said suit was dismissed on
13.01.1999. An appeal 4A/99 filled by workman was also dismissed by the 4th Additional District
Judge on 16.03.2001. 2nd party further submits that the claim of workman is barred by resjudicata.
The reference is not tenable. The Hon’ble Tribunal held that:

 The action of the management is proper and legal.

 Workman is not entitled for any relief.
 P a g e | 18

2. In the case of The Secretary, Chhattisgarh Sangrami Shramik Sang v. The Managing
Director, Bhilai Steel Plant

Facts of the case: The Central Government after satisfying the existence of dispute between the
Secretary, Chhattisgarh Sangrami Shramik Sang, Indira Nagar, Dallirajhara, Durg, Chhattisgarh
(Party No.1) and the Managing Director, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai, Durg, Chhattisgarh (party
No.2), referred the same for adjudication to the Tribunal vide its letter No. 1-26012/8/2008-IR(M)
dated 26-8-2008 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947(14 of 1947) with the following Schedule.

“Whether the action of the management of Bhilai Steel Plant (SAIL) in their Iron Ore Complex,
Dallirajhara, Durg in punishing Shri S.K. Verma, Sr. Operator, HEME with the punishment of
‘Reduction by two stages in the time scale (S-07) reducing his basic pay from Rs.7384/- to 7072/-
PM in the scale S-07 w.e.f 1/10/2005 for a period of 2 years with cumulative effect’ vide letter of
punishment No.OMQ/DLM/ESTT/PUN/2005/1846 dated 22/9/2005 of Dy. G.M. Dalli Mech.
Mines is justified? What relief the workman is entitled to?”

The case was fixed at Bilaspur Camp as the petitioner is resident of the area. Initially, on reference
the petitioner was served with the notice to appear before this tribunal at Nagpur, but despite of
service he did not appear. Similarly, the case was fixed on 2 occasions for appearing at Bilaspur
camp. At that time also he was served with the notices to appear before this court. However, he
did not attend any of the camp. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the
case. Hence, it is dismissed for his default and no dispute award has been passed.

3. In the case of Steel Bajrang v. Bhilai Steel Plant in front of the Industrial Tribunal in Jabalpur
(M.P.), the management of Bhilai Steel Plant was not held liable for retrenchment of a contractual
workman.
Facts of the case are as follows:
Petitioner was a contractual workman employed in the Dalli Rajhara mines of Bhilai Steel Plant
appointed by the contractor M/s Commercial Transport Company. Thus, Bhilai Steel Plant was
not the actual employer but only a principal employer. As per the rules and procedure, regular
medical check-up was done of each employee. Thereby, a proper test was done by the Medical
Board. The Petitioner was declared unfit for working in the mines by virtue of his poor vision
(6/60) as the Standing Orders (Mines) read with the concerned Rules prescribed the required
 P a g e | 19

eyesight of 6/12 – 6/18). As such, the petitioner’s name was removed from Form-B and his entry
into the mines was stopped. Thereafter, the petitioner was removed from employment by the
contractor. Aggrieved by this, he filed a complaint against Bhilai Steel Plant for illegal
retrenchment. The two major claims made by the petitioner were that Bhilai Steel Plant was its
actual employer as it payed his Provident Fund as mandated by the Standing Orders. Further, the
medical report of District Hospital (Durg) which declared him fit for working in the mines was not
taken into consideration before dismissing him from work. The CGIT Jabalpur took into account
all these contentions and found that, as such, the Provident Fund was payed by the contractor who
was the actual employer and not BSP. Furthermore, the report of District Hospital was not
acceptable as per the Rules. Moreover, Rule 29(j) of the Mines Act, 1952 allows provision for
appeal to Medical Board for re-examination within 30 days. No such appeal had been filed;
therefore, the medical certificate of District Hospital was not acceptable. Hence, the Tribunal was
of the opinion that Bhilai Steel Plant was not liable for illegal
Retrenchment as claimed by the petitioner.

4. In the case of P.K. Trivedi v. Bhilai Steel Plant

Facts of the case: the petitioner was an employee in the Nandini Mines of the Bhilai Steel Pant
and the President of a Trade Union, CSSS, representing the workers in the mine. The petitioner
was charged with several misconducts as per the Standing orders (Mines) such as stoppage of
work, inciting the co-workers to strike, holding meetings within the Mines without authorization,
etc. A departmental enquiry was held against the delinquent employee and as many as 5 charges
out of the alleged 7 charges were affirmed and thereby he was held liable for the misconduct. As
a result he was penalized with demotion of two grades to S-6 with cumulative effect. Aggrieved
by the order of the management, the union referred the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal. The
petition further contended that being the President of the Trade Union he was voicing against the
current conditions of work as well as the salary being given. But the management didn’t heed to
their demands, on the other hand, he was being targeted unjustly. Also, the misconducts listed in
the charge-sheet against him and the penalty so imposed was not as per the Standing Orders .
 P a g e | 20

The management put forth its witness and pleaded that his conduct called for dismissal but the
management took lenient view considering his age and penalized him with demotion of 2 grades
to S-6 with cumulative effect.

However the Tribunal decided in favour of the departmental enquiry held against the Petitioner.
Taking into consideration the testimony of the officer in-charge of mines as well as other witness,
5 out of the 7 charges against the Petitioner were affirmed. The Tribunal, further stated that the
penalty on the grounds of misconduct was according to Section- 29 of the Standing Orders (mines).

Hence, the tribunal upheld the penalty imposed by the management upon its departmental enquiry
and the penalty was allowed as per Rules.
 P a g e | 21

III

Amendment of Industrial Dispute Act.

Industrial Dispute Amendment Act 1982

The Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 has undergone several amendments since 1947. Thus, the
Industrial Dispute (Amendment) Act,1982 made the following amendments: (1) Amended the
definition of ‘appropriate government’ (2) Amended the definition of industry and thereby
curtailed the scope of ‘industry’ as laid down by the SC in the case Banglore Water Supply &
Sewerage Board v. A Rajappa (3) Inserted a new clause (cc) defining ‘closure’ (iv) Inserted clauses
of Section 2, i.e. Section 2 (ka) and 1(kka) (5) Inserted new sections i.e. section 2(qq), 2(ra) and
2(rb) defining ‘trade union’, unfair labour practice and village industries. (6) Inserted chapter VC
dealing with the prohibition of unfair labour practices and penalty. (7) Inserted Chapter IIB which
provides for grievance settlement authorities. (8) Extended the special provisions relating to layoff,
retrenchment, and closure in establishments employing not less than 100 workmen. It also includes
for the procedure for closing an under taking and penalty for violation thereof.

Industrial Dispute Amendment Act 1984

The Industrial Dispute amendment act 1984 made the following amendments (1) it excludes the
definition of ‘retrenchment’ as contained in the act ‘termination of the service of a workman as a
result of the non-renewal of the contract of employment on its expiry and on the termination of
such contract in accordance with the provisions thereof. (2) The Supreme Court in the case of
Excel wear case some high courts declared invalid the special provisions relating to layoff and
retrenchment contained in the Act which applied to establishments employing 300 or more
workmen. It redrafted these provisions on the same lines as in the amended provision relating to
closure, which was inserted by the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act 1982, after taking into
consideration the observations of the Supreme Court in the said case.
 P a g e | 22

Industrial Dispute Amendment Act 2010

The Industrial Dispute amendment act 2010 made the following amendments

Section 2(a): Amplification of the definition of the Appropriate Government—The

amendment Act 2010 has amplified the definition of “appropriate government” under section 2(a)
of the Act. The Central Government is the appropriate as per the category listed in Section 2(a) (i)
of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947. Adding up to this, it is further clarified that “Central
Government would be appropriate government for any company in which not less than 51 percent
of the paid up share capital is held by the Central Government, or any corporation, established by
or under any law made by the Parliament, or the Central Public Sector. Undertaking, subsidiary
companies set up by the principal undertaking and autonomous bodies owned or controlled by the
Central Government. Further, State Government is also covered under the definition of appropriate
Government in relation to any other industrial dispute, which includes the State Public Sector
Undertaking, Subsidiary companies set up by the principal undertaking and autonomous bodies
owned or controlled by the State Government. The Act has incorporated the recommendation of
the Standing Committee to amplify the definition of “appropriate government” i.e. Central or State
Government, as the case may be. Section 2(s) (iv): Enhancement of wage ceiling in the
definition of workmen. – The wage ceiling limit in the definition of workmen under Section
2(s)(iv) of the ID Act, 1947 has been enhanced from Rs 1600 per month to Rs 10,000 per month.
This ceiling limit enhancement is done to bring in the wages of industrial workers in parity with
different labour laws. Section 2A – Direct reference of disputes relating to
Termination/Dismissal/Retrenchment/ Discharge to Industrial Tribunals By the Amendment
Act, 2010 a provision has been made for the workman/ employee pertaining to retrenchment,
discharge, dismissal or termination of services etc. to directly approach the Labour Court or
Tribunal for adjudication of disputes after the expiry of three months from the date he had made
the application to the conciliation officer of the appropriate government. The application shall be
made to the Labour Court or Tribunal before the expiry of three years from the date of discharge,
dismissal, retrenchment or otherwise termination of service. Chapter IIB – Substitution of a new
Chapter IIB titled as Grievance Redressal Machinery (GRM) - the amendment provides that,
every industrial establishment employing 20 or more workmen shall have to constitute one or more
Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) within their organization for the resolution of disputes
 P a g e | 23

arising out of individual grievances. The Grievance Redressal Committee shall consist of equal
number of members from the employer and workman and the total number of members should not
exceed more than six. And as far as practicable, if the committee has two members out of which
one member should be a woman, and in case of increase in number of members, the participation
of women members may be increased appropriately. The GRC may complete its proceeding within
45 days on receipt of a written application by or on behalf of the aggrieved party. The setting up
of the GRM will in no way effect the right of the workman to raise dispute on the same issue under
provisions of this Act. The workman aggrieved of the decision of the GRC may prefer an appeal
to the employer, who shall within one month from the date of receipt of such appeal, dispose of
the same and send a copy of the same to the workman concerned. Section 7 and 7A- Scope of
qualification of Presiding Officers the Scope of qualifications of Presiding Officers of Tribunal
and labour Court has been expanded. Now the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) or
joint Labour Commissioner of the State Labour Department or Grade III officer of the Indian Legal
Service will be eligible for appointment for the post of Presiding Officers. Section 38 (2) (c)-
changes in salaries and other terms and conditions of Presiding Officer- As per the amendment
in Section 38(2) (c) there is a specific provision in the Act, according to which the appropriate
government will frame rules to decide and review salaries, allowance and other terms and
conditions for the appointment of Presiding Officers. Section 11- Enforcement of Orders arrived
at by Labour Court or Tribunal- the amendment lays down the awards, orders of settlements
arrived by the Labour Court or Tribunal will be executed in accordance with the procedure laid
down for enforcement of the awards and decree of Civil Court. This to check the better
enforcement of the awards passed by the Labour Courts or Tribunals and to empower them.
 P a g e | 24

Comparative study of Industrial Dispute Act

S.No Section Pre-amended position Post-amended position

1 Sec.2(a)(i) The scope of appropriate Now this scope has been expanded to
Government so far as include companies- (i) In which not
concerned was restricted to less than 51% of the paid up share
only those enumerated in sub- capital is held by Central Government
clause(i) of clause (a) of sec. 2 or any corporation (excluding those
mentioned in such clause
(i) set-up by Central Law or held by
central public sector undertaking or by
subsidiaries of principal undertakings
owned by or controlled by the Central
Government.
(ii) Another important amendment
made to clause (a) of sec.2 is to define
appropriate government with regard to
disputes between contractor and the
contract labour. It now depends up on
the question whether the industrial
establishment which employs the
contract labour in which such disputes
arises, falls under the control of Central
Govt., central govt. will be the
appropriate government otherwise, the
state Govt.
2 Sec 2(s)(iv) Supervisors drawing wages Now, Supervisors drawing wages not
not exceeding Rs.1600/p.m exceeding Rs. 10000/- p.m are coming
are coming within the within the definition of workmen.
definition of workmen.
 P a g e | 25

3. Sec.2A Under present provision, an After amendment, a new sub- section

individual dispute raised a (2) and (3) have been added which
workman who is retrenched or enable the individual workman who is
dismissed can be adjudicated retrenched or dismissed and who raises
by the Labour Court/Industrial the dispute before conciliation officer,
Tribunal only when it is can now directly make an application
referred by the Government on to the Labour Court/Tribunal for
receipt of report from adjudication of his dispute after a lapse
Conciliation Officer. of 45 days from the date of making an
application to the conciliation officer.

(3) The application referred to in sub-

section (2) shall be made to the Labour
Court or Tribunal before the expiry of
three years from the date of discharge,
dismissal, retrenchment or otherwise
termination of service as specified in
sub-section (1).
4 Section 7 No such clause exist The new clauses are inserted 7(f),(g)
7(f) “He is or has been a Deputy Chief
Labour Commissioner (Central) or
Joint Commissioner of the State
Labour Department, having a degree in
law and at least seven years experience
in the labour department including
three years of experience as
Conciliation Officer.”
7(g) he is an officer of Indian Service
in Grade III with three years experience
in the grade.
 P a g e | 26

5 Section 7A No such clause existed After clause (aa) the following clauses
shall be inserted:
(b) he is or has been a Deputy Chief
Labour Commissioner (Central) or
Joint Commissioner of the State
Labour Department, having a degree in
law and at least seven years’
experience in the labour department
including three years of experience as
Conciliation Officer.
(c) he is now an officer of Indian Legal
Service in Grade III with three years’
experience in the grade.”
6 Chapter IIB The present Sec. 9(C) does not The new section 9(C) provides-
Sec.9(C) precisely give the constitution i) Composition of the Grievance
of the grievance redressal Redressal Committee.
mechanism and the procedure. ii) Fixes a thirty day time limit for
This section has been Redressal of the grievance.
constituted by Sec.9(C) iii) Provides for appeal to the employer
by the workman aggrieved by the
decision of the committee
7 Sec.11 The present section does not New subsections (9) and (10) have
refer to the manner of been added to section 11 where by the
execution of awards made by Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal
Labour Court/Industrial shall transmit any award or order or
Tribunal. settlement arrived before it to a civil
court which will execute the same as if
it were a decree passed by it.
8 Sec.38 Sec. 38 (i) (ab) – the Sec.38 (i) (ab) shall be omitted
constitution of Grievance (ii) for clause (c) the following clause
shall be substituted, namely:-
 P a g e | 27

Settlement Authorities (c) the salaries and allowances and the

referred to in Section 9C
terms and conditions for appointment
of the presiding officers of the Labour
Court, Tribunal and the National
Tribunal including the allowances
admissible to members of courts,
Boards and to assessors and witnesses.

The procedure of Settlement of Dispute before and after in Bhilai Steel Plant

Earlier in Bhilai Steel Plant, the Industrial Dispute was resolved by Industrial Relation Act, in
which the employee alone can directly approach the Labour Court for the settlement of the dispute.
But after the Commencement of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947, the employee cannot approach
to Labour Court Directly. First, the employee has to approach for conciliation, if the conciliation
fails, then the employee raises its dispute through the Trade Union and resolve its dispute through
Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT)-cum-Labour Courts. Now the number of cases
filled has decreased in Bhilai Steel Plant as during the Industrial Relation Act any individual
employee can approach the Labour Court. But after the Industrial Dispute Act 1947, no individual
can approach the court directly, there is a procedure to be followed. After the amendment of the
Industrial Dispute Act 2010. Section 2A Provides – Direct reference of disputes relating to
Termination/Dismissal/Retrenchment/ Discharge to Industrial Tribunals by the Amendment Act,
2010 a provision has been made for the workman/ employee pertaining to retrenchment, discharge,
dismissal or termination of services etc. to directly approach the Labour Court or Tribunal for
adjudication of disputes after the expiry of three months from the date he had made the application
to the conciliation officer of the appropriate government. The application shall be made to the
Labour Court or Tribunal before the expiry of three years from the date of discharge, dismissal,
retrenchment or otherwise termination of service.
 P a g e | 28

CONCLUSION:

The Industrial Dispute Act is the most elaborative part of legislation that governs the formation
and conduct of industrial affairs. The Act confers a variety of powers on the Central Government
and the Industrial Law board to monitor, regulates and controls the affairs of the Industries. The
Industrial Dispute Act secures industrial peace and harmony by providing machinery and
procedure for the investigation and settlement of industrial disputes by negotiations. The
amendments will serve to address few issues that have been pressing to all stake holders. The
important among them are the following: 1. The introduction of permanent grievance machinery
which will help employees, trade unions and employers settle the issue at the workplace itself,
instead of dragging it through a long and laborious process. 2. The enhancement in the salary levels
for consideration under the act will not only bring harmony between legislation but also enhance
the coverage and protection of the workers 3. Another area of change will be on labour
administration front, whereby changing the definition of qualification and reviewing the
remuneration of Presiding officers, the efficiency of the system can be improved.