KASHMIR UNIVERSITY

DEPARTMENT OF LAW

B.A.L.L.B (OLD COURSE)

NAME OF COLLEGE:- VITASTA SCHOOL OF LAW AND HUMANITES

ENROLLMENT NUMBER :- 16042125050.

SUBJECT:- LABOUR LAWS I.

SEMESTER :- 3RD BACKLOG OLD COURSE.

PROFESSOR INCHARGE :- ASMA YASOOB.

DATE OF SUBMISSION :-21/07/2020

ASSIGNMENT TITLE:- WHAT ARE THE CAUSES OF INDUSTRAIL DISPUTE?EXPLAIN

THE MACHINERY FOR HE SETTLEMENT OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN INDIA?
DISCUSS THE POWER OF GOVERNNMENT TO REFER INDUSTRAIL DISPUTES FOR
ADJUDICATION
Industrial dispute means any dispute of difference between employees and employers or between
employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the
employment or non-employment of the terms of employment or the conditions of work of any
person (The industrial Disputes Act 1947, Section 2K).

Every human being (say a labour) has certain requirements/needs e.g., economic needs, social
needs, security requirements. When these requirements do not get satisfied, there arises a conflict
between the worker and the capitalist/employer.

The industrial disputes are of two types i.e., individual disputes and collective disputes. The
individual disputes may be disputes such as reinstatement, compensation for wrong termination
etc. Disputes relating to wages, bonus, profit sharing hours of work etc. are collective disputes.

According to Section 2A: Where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches or

otherwise terminates the services of an individual workman, 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 notwithstanding that no
other workman nor any union of workmen is a party to the dispute.

Industrial Disputes have adverse effects on industrial production, efficiency, costs, quality,
human satisfaction, discipline, technological and economic progress and finally on the welfare of
the society. A discontent labour force, nursing in its heart mute grievances and resentments,
cannot be efficient and will not possess a high degree of industrial morale. Hence, the Industrial
Dispute Act of 1947, was passed as a preventive and curative measure.

SCOPE AND OBJECT

The Industrial Dispute Act of 1947, came into force on the first day of April, 1947. Its aim is to
protect the workmen against victimization by the employers and to ensure social justice to both
employers and employees. The unique object of the Act is to promote collective bargaining and
to maintain a peaceful atmosphere in industries by avoiding illegal strikes and lock outs. The Act
also provides for regulation of lay off and retrenchment. The objective of the Industrial Disputes
Act is to secure industrial peace and harmony by providing machinery and procedure for the
investigation and settlement of industrial disputes by negotiations.

Causes of Industrial Disputes

The new industrial set up has given birth to the capitalistic economy which divided the industrial
society into groups of labour and capitalists. Capitalists own resources and have possession over
means of production on the other hand; labour sells services which cannot be stored. The
interests of the two groups are not common.

One strive for higher wages and congenial working conditions whereas the other takes advantage
of workers’ poor bargaining power and deny them their due rights. Besides, the employers want
higher productivity. When these two conflicting interests clash, industrial disputes arise
Although there is multitude of cause’s blended together, result in industrial disputes, it is not
easy to ascertain the particular cause or causes involved. Surface manifestation of work stoppage
may cover deep-seated and more basic causes which cannot be observed at first sight.

It has been observed by the experts of industrial relations that the cause of conflict between the
two parties is the same in all capitalistic economy.

There are a number of causes for industrial disputes which can

be classified into four categories as follows:

(1) Economic Causes:

Really, the most common causes of industrial disputes are economic causes.

These are as follows:

(a) Wages:
The demand for wage increase is the prime-most cause of the industrial disputes. A large number
of strikes are being organised to raise a voice against the rise in prices and cost of living. The
real wages of the workers decline faster with the increase in price level and they feel dissatisfied
with their present emoluments and struggle for the improvement in wages. By having a cursory
glance on the history of industrial disputes; it becomes clear that cause of most of the industrial
disputes was wages. The Indian employer has no clear-cut and enlightened wage policy.

(b) Dearness Allowance and Bonus:

Increase in cost of living was the main cause of the demand of dearness allowance by the
workers to equate their wages with the rise in prices. Bonus also plays an important role as a
cause of industrial dispute. It is interesting to note that in 1966, 49 percent of the disputes were
related to wages and bonus.

Both the quantum and the method of bonus payment have led to a number of disputes. There is
an increasing feeling among the workers that they should have a greater share in the profits of
the concern and this fact has not been recognised by the employees and non-acceptance of this
fact has been a source of friction among employers and employees.

(c) Working Condition and Working Hours:

The working conditions in Indian industries are not hygienic. There is not ample provision of
water, heating, lighting, safety etc. Working hours are also greater. The demand of palatable
working conditions and shorter hours of work are also responsible for labour disputes.

(d) Modernisation and Automation of Plant and Machinery:

The attempt at modernisation and introduction of automatic machinery to replace labour has
been the major cause of disputes in India. Workers go on strike, off and on, to resist
rationalisation and automation. A strike in cotton textile industry in Kanpur in 1955 is an
example of such disputes. Workers in Life Insurance.
(e) High Industrial Profits:

During and after the world wars, prices of the commodities went up and the industrialists earned
huge profits. In order to get share in the prosperity of the industry, it naturally led to the
resentment on their part. The increased profits also led to the demands of higher wages and
bonus. Now in the changing world, concept of labour has changed considerably. They think
themselves as a partner of the industry and demand their share in the profits.

(f) Demand for Other Facilities:

Demand for other facilities for meeting out their basic needs such as medical, education, housing, etc.,
encourage the workers to resort to direct action because such facilities were denied by the employers.

(2) Managerial Causes of Industrial Disputes:

These causes include autocratic managerial attitude and defective labour policies etc.

(a) Denial of Recognition to Trade Unions:

Failure on the part of the employer to recognise the trade unions or to recognise the rival union
for representation, insult of trade union leaders by the employers are some of the examples of
autocratic managerial attitude worth mentioning as the causes of industrial disputes. The attitude
of employers towards the labour associations had never been sympathetic. They want to divide
them and rule.

Moreover, the management is generally not willing to talk over the dispute with the workers or
workers’ representatives or refer it to ‘arbitration’ even when the workers are willing to do so.

(b) Defective Recruitment Policies:

The recruitment practices in Indian industries are defective. Recruitment is generally made by
the contractors who exploit the workers and suppress their individuality. The defective
promotion, demotion, transfer and placement policies encourage dissatisfaction among workers.

(c) Irregular Lay-Off and Retrenchment:

Lay-off and retrenchment are reasons to be mentioned for encouraging industrial disputes. Indian
employers follow the policy of ‘Hire and Fire’. As a matter of practice, workers are not made
permanent for a pretty long time to deprive them of their legitimate rights.

(d) Defiance of Agreements and Codes:

The employers regularly defy the provisions of collective bargaining agreements and code of
conduct and code of discipline with a view to harass or exploit the employees and just encourage
strife.

(e) Defective Leadership:

Inefficient leadership is also one of the causes of disputes. Leadership from the management and
from the workers is quite incompetent to induce the workers to get them worked. The employers’
representatives are not delegated sufficient authority to negotiate with the workers.

They are not in a position to commit anything to workers on behalf of the management.
Defective management leadership ignored the labour problems and inefficient labour leadership
could not coordinate the efforts of their fellow members, so disputes arise.

(3) Government Machinery:

Government measures to prevent and machinery to settle the disputes are not much effective.

There are two examples:

(i) Enactments are Ineffective:

Though there is a plethora of enactments for promotion of harmonious industrial relations, yet it
is ineffective and unsatisfactory in most cases due to:

(a) The irrelevancy in the context of the challenges of present industrial climate/culture, as many
has not been convinced of their utility satisfactorily;

(b) Improper and inadequate implementation by many employers;

(c) Incapability of understanding and answering imperatives of development.

(ii) Little Confidence over Settlement Machinery:

Both employers and employees have little confidence over the Conciliation Machinery as it
could succeed in settling a very negligible number of disputes so far. Both employers and
employees are litigation-minded. Moreover, the settlement machinery is quite inadequate
because, it has to see whether labour laws are properly being implemented or not.

(4) Voluntary Arbitration:

Mr. V.V. Giri was the promoter and supporter of voluntary arbitration and regarded compulsory
adjudication as enemy number one of collective bargaining and industrial peace.

The Code of Discipline and the Industrial Truce Resolution adopted by the central organisations
of employers and employees also stress the significance of voluntary arbitration. It was agreed
by the two partners of industry that any dispute would be referred to voluntary arbitration if
conciliation efforts fail and settle the dispute mutually and without recourse to legal remedies.

The Government of India took note of the intention of both the parties and set up the National
Arbitration Promotion Board in July 1967, to promote voluntary arbitration to settle industrial
disputes. The Board comprises of the representatives of the employers’ and employees’
organisations, public undertakings, and the Central and State Governments.

(5) Wage Boards:

Wages and allowances is the main issue in industrial disputes. The Government of India set up
wage boards for various industries. The main function of wage boards is to fix the fair wage in
various industries. Upto now more than 25 wage boards in various industries have been set up.

(6) Standing Orders:

In order to avoid frictions between employer and his workmen over the terms of employment,
the Government enacted the Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act 1946.

The object of the Act is to require employers to diffuse with sufficient precision, the conditions
of employment in the establishments- under him and to let the workers know. Such conditions
include conditions of recruitment, discharge, disciplinary action, holiday, leave etc., of the
workers.

This Act applies to all establishment employing 50 or more workers. In 1961, the Act was made
applicable to some other establishments employing even less than 100 workers at the instance of
State Governments. Under the Act, each employer is required to certify the standing orders by
the certifying officer to make them effective in the establishment.

(7) Joint Management Councils:

Just to make a start labour participation in management, the Government in its Industrial
Resolution 1956, decided to set up Joint Management Councils. This step also remained
ineffective and not much headway is made in this direction. Currently, there are hardly 80 JMCs
and even out of them a good number are not effective.

These Councils have equal representative of workers and management. The main function of
these councils is to make consultation in matters relating to workers. All matters which are
subject to collective bargaining have been excluded.

(8) Other Causes:

Among these may be included the following:

(i) Almost every trade union in India is affiliated to one or the other political party. Political
parties or political ideologies govern these trade unions. Each party, therefore, engineers strikes,
gheraos and bandhs to demonstrate its political strength. The trade union, affiliated to a party in
power gets preferential treatment.

(ii) Trade Unions in India are Weak:

They, invariably, fail in safeguarding the interests of workers.

The reasons for this state of affairs are:

(a) Multiplicity of trade unions in the same industry/unit and rivalry among the workers has
destroyed the solidarity of the working class.
(b) In some undertakings, there is no union at all recognised or unrecognised. They have not
been allowed to form a union, and therefore, they are deprived of their right of collective
bargaining.

(c) The workers generally are uncertain with the activities except wages.

(d) Trade union leaders, themselves aim at fulfilling ulterior motives leading to thwarting the
attempts of trade union unity.

(iii) Political instability, Centre-State relations, general responsibility or all fronts are reflected in
industry resulting in industrial conflict.

(iv) Other potential factors such as rampant corruption in industrial and public life, easy money,
conspicuous consumption, permissive society, character crises and genera! Break down in the
national morale have brought in their train debasement of social values and social norms— all
these can and have perpetuated all kinds of unrest, including industrial unrest.

Thus, industrial disputes are the result of so many causes. Sometimes, a number of causes
collectively contribute to the dispute. All the actors of industrial relations viz. employers,
workers and the Government in maintaining industrial peace must try to redress any grievances
before it takes form of a dispute.

Some of the major industrial dispute settlement machinery are as follows: 1. Conciliation 2.
Court of Inquiry 3. Voluntary Arbitration 4. Adjudication.

This machinery has been provided under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It, in fact, provides a
legalistic way of setting the disputes. As said above, the goal of preventive machinery is to create
an environment where the disputes do not arise at all.

Even then if any differences arise, the judicial machinery has been provided to settle them lest
they should result into work stoppages. In this sense, the nature of this machinery is curative for
it aims at curing the aliments.

This machinery comprises following organs:

1. Conciliation

2. Court of enquiry
3. Voluntary arbitration

4. Adjudication (Compulsory arbitration)

1. Conciliation:
Conciliation, is a form of mediation. Mediation is the act of making active effort to bring two
conflicting parties to compromise. Mediation, however, differs from conciliation in that whereas
conciliator plays only a passive and indirect role, and the scope of his functions is provided
under the law, the mediator takes active part and the scope of his activities are not subject to any
statutory provisions.

Conciliation is the “practice by which the services of a neutral party are used in a dispute as a
means of helping the disputing parties to reduce the extent of their differences and to arrive at an
amicable settlement of agreed solution.” The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for
conciliation, and can be utilised either by appointing conciliation officers (permanently or for a
limited period) or by constituting a board of conciliation. This conciliation machinery can take a
note of a dispute or apprehend dispute either on its own or when approached by either party.

With a view to expediting conciliation proceeding, time-limits have been prescribed—14 days in
the case of conciliation officers and two months in the case of a board of conciliation, settlement
arrived at in the course of conciliation is binding for such period as may be agreed upon between
the parties or for a period of 6 months and with continue to be binding until revoked by either
party. The Act prohibits strike and lock-out during the pendency of conciliation proceedings
before a Board and for seven days after the conclusion of such proceedings.

Conciliation Officer:
The law provides for the appointment of Conciliation Officer by the Government to conciliate
between the parties to the industrial dispute. The Conciliation Officer is given the powers of a
civil court, whereby he is authorised to call the witness the parties on oath. It should be
remembered, however, whereas civil court cannot go beyond interpreting the laws, the
conciliation officer can go behind the facts and make judgment which will be binding upon the
parties.

On receiving information about a dispute, the conciliation officer should give formal intimation
in writing to the parties concerned of his intention to commence conciliation proceedings from a
specified date. He should then start doing all such things as he thinks fit for the purpose of
persuading the parties to come to fair and amicable settlement of the dispute.
Board of Conciliation:

In case Conciliation Officer fails to resolve the differences between the parties, the government
has the discretion to appoint a Board of Conciliation. The Board is tripartite and ad hoc body. It
consists of a chairman and two or four other members.

The chairman is to be an independent person and other members are nominated in equal number
by the parties to the dispute. Conciliation proceedings before a Board are similar to those that
take place before the Conciliation Officer. The Government has yet another option of referring
the dispute to the Court of Inquiry instead of the Board of Conciliation.

The machinery of the Board is set in motion when a dispute is referred to it. In other words, the
Board does not hold the conciliation proceedings of its own accord. On the dispute being referred
to the Board, it is the duty of the Board to do all things as it thinks fit for the purpose of inducing
the parties to come to a fair and amicable settlement. The Board must submit its report to the
government within two months of the date on which the dispute was referred to it. This period
can be further extended by the government by two months.

2. Court of Inquiry:
In case of the failure of the conciliation proceedings to settle a dispute, the government can
appoint a Court of Inquiry to enquire into any matter connected with or relevant to industrial
dispute. The court is expected to submit its report within six months. The court of enquiry may
consist of one or more persons to be decided by the appropriate government.

The court of enquiry is required to submit its report within a period of six months from the
commencement of enquiry. This report is subsequently published by the government within 30
days of its receipt. Unlike during the period of conciliation, workers’ right to strike, employers’
right to lockout, and employers’ right to dismiss workmen, etc. remain unaffected during the
proceedings in a court to enquiry.

A court of enquiry is different from a Board of Conciliation. The former aims at inquiring into
and revealing the causes of an industrial dispute. On the other hand, the latter’s basic objective is
to promote the settlement of an industrial dispute. Thus, a court of enquiry is primarily fact-
finding machinery.
3. Voluntary Arbitration:
On failure of conciliation proceedings, the conciliation officer many persuade the parties to refer
the dispute to a voluntary arbitrator. Voluntary arbitration refers to getting the disputes settled
through an independent person chosen by the parties involved mutually and voluntarily.

In other words, arbitration offers an opportunity for a solution of the dispute through an arbitrator
jointly appointed by the parties to the dispute. The process of arbitration saves time and money
of both the parties which is usually wasted in case of adjudication.

Voluntary arbitration became popular as a method a settling differences between workers and
management with the advocacy of Mahatma Gandhi, who had applied it very successfully in the
Textile industry of Ahmedabad. However, voluntary arbitration was lent legal identity only in
1956 when Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was amended to include a provision relating to it.

The provision for voluntary arbitration was made because of the lengthy legal proceedings and
formalities and resulting delays involved in adjudication. It may, however, be noted that
arbitrator is not vested with any judicial powers.

He derives his powers to settle the dispute from the agreement that parties have made between
themselves regarding the reference of dispute to the arbitrator. The arbitrator should submit his
award to the government. The government will then publish it within 30 days of such
submission. The award would become enforceable on the expiry of 30 days of its publication.

Voluntary arbitration is one of the democratic ways for setting industrial disputes. It is the best
method for resolving industrial conflicts and is a close’ supplement to collective bargaining. It
not only provides a voluntary method of settling industrial disputes, but is also a quicker way of
settling them.

It is based on the notion of self-government in industrial relations. Furthermore, it helps to curtail

the protracted proceedings attendant on adjudication, connotes a healthy attitude and a developed
outlook; assists in strengthening the trade union movement and contributes for building up sound
and cordial industrial relations.

4. Adjudication:
The ultimate remedy for the settlement of an industrial dispute is its reference to adjudication by
labour court or tribunals when conciliation machinery fails to bring about a settlement.
Adjudication consists of settling disputes through intervention by the third party appointed by the
government. The law provides the adjudication to be conducted by the Labour Court, Industrial
Tribunal of National Tribunal.

A dispute can be referred to adjudication if hot the employer and the recognised union agree to
do so. A dispute can also be referred to adjudication by the Government even if there is no
consent of the parties in which case it is called ‘compulsory adjudication’. As mentioned above,
the dispute can be referred to three types of tribunals depending on the nature and facts of
dispute in questions.

These include:

(a) Labour courts,

(b) Industrial tribunals, and

(c) National tribunals.

The procedure, powers, and provisions regarding commencement of award and period of operation of
award of these three bodies are similar. The first two bodies can be set up either by State or Central
Government but the national tribunal can be constituted by the Central Government only, when it
thinks that the adjudication of a dispute is of national importance. These three bodies are into
hierarchical in nature. It is the Government’s prerogative to refer a dispute to any of these bodies
depending on the nature of dispute.

(а) Labour Court:

A labour court consists of one person only, who is normally a sitting or an ex-judge of a High Court. It
may be constituted by the appropriate Government for adjudication of disputes which are mentioned in
the second schedule of the Act.

The issues referred to a labour court may include:

(i)The propriety or legality of an order passed by an employer under the Standing Orders.

(ii) The application and interpretation of Standing Orders.

(iii) Discharge and dismissal of workmen and grant of relief to them.

(iv) Withdrawal of any statutory concession or privilege.

(v) Illegality or otherwise of any strike or lockout.

(vi) All matters not specified in the third schedule of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (It deals with the
jurisdiction of Industrial Tribunals).

(b) Industrial Tribunal:

Like a labour court, an industrial tribunal is also a one-man body. The matters which fall within the
jurisdiction of industrial tribunals are as mentioned in the second schedule or the third schedule of the
Act. Obviously, industrial tribunals have wider jurisdiction than the labour courts.
Moreover an industrial tribunal, in addition to the presiding officer, can have two assessors to advise
him in the proceedings; the appropriate Government is empowered to appoint the assessors.

The Industrial Tribunal may be referred the following issues:

1. Wages including the period and mode of payment.

2. Compensatory and other allowances.

3. Hours of work and rest intervals.

4. Leave with wages and holidays.

5. Bonus, profit sharing, provident fund and gratuity.

6. Shift working otherwise than in accordance with the standing orders.

7. Rule of discipline.

8. Rationalisation.

9. Retrenchment.

10. Any other matter that may be prescribed.

(c) National Tribunal:

The Central Government may constitute a national tribunal for adjudication of disputes as mentioned in
the second and third schedules of the Act or any other matter not mentioned therein provided in its
opinion the industrial dispute involves “questions of national importance” or “the industrial dispute is of
such a nature that undertakings established in more than one state are likely to be affected by such a
dispute”.

The Central Government may appoint two assessors to assist the national tribunal. The award of the
tribunal is to be submitted to the Central Government which has the power to modify or reject it if it
considers it necessary in public interest.

It should be noted that every award of a Labour Court, Industrial Tribunal or National Tribunal must be
published by the appropriate Government within 30 days from the date of its receipt. Unless declared
otherwise by the appropriate government, every award shall come into force on the expiry of 30 days
from the date of its publication and shall remain in operation for a period of one year thereafter.

Section 7 of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 : "Labour Courts"

7. (1) The appropriate Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute one or more
Labour Courts for the adjudication of industrial disputes relating to any matter specified in the Second
Schedule and for performing such other functions as may be assigned to them under this Act.
(2) A Labour Court shall consist of one person only to be appointed by the appropriate Government.

(3) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court, unless-

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

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

(c) ***

(d) he has held any judicial office in India for not less than seven years; or

(e) he has been the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court constituted under any Provincial Act or State Act
for not less than five years.

(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:

Provided that no such Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner or Joint Labour Commissioner shall be
appointed unless he resigns from the service of the Central Government or State Government, as the
case may be, before being appointed as the presiding officer; or

(g) he is an officer of Indian Legal Service in Grade III with three years' experience in the grade.

STATE AMENDMENTS
GUJARAT
In section 7, in sub-section (3),-
(i) in clause (b), after the words "Additional District Judge," the words "or a Joint Judge or an Assistant
Judge" shall be inserted;

(ii) in clause (d), for the words "seven years" the words "five years" shall be substituted;

(iii) in clause (e ), for the words "five years" the words "three years" shall be substituted and the word
"or" shall be added at the end;

(iv) after clause (e), the following clause shall be added, namely :-

"(f) he has practiced as an advocate or attorney for not less than seven years in a High Court or any
Court subordinate thereto or in any Industrial Court or Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court constituted
under any law for the time being in force;" - Gujarat Act No. 28 of 1977.
HARYANA
In sub-section (3) of section 7,- (i) for clause (b), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:-

"(b) he is qualified for appointment as, is, or has been, a District Judge or an Additional District Judge,
or"; and

(ii) after clause (c), the following clause shall be inserted, namely :-

"(cc) He has been a Commissioner of a division or an Administrative Secretary to Government or an

officer of the Labour Department not below the rank of a Joint Labour Commissioner for a period of not
less than two years; or" - Haryana Act No. 39 of 1976.

MADHYA PRADESH
In section 7, after sub-section (1), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:-

"(1A) In addition to the functions specified in sub-section (1) the Labour Court shall try offences
punishable under this Act and the Acts specified in Part B of the Second Schedule." - Madhya Pradesh
Act No. 43 of 1981.

In section 7, in sub-section (3), for clause (e), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:-

"(e) he has been the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court constituted under the Madhya Pradesh
Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (No. 27 of 1960), for not less than three years." - Madhya Pradesh Act No.
32 of 1998.

MAHARASHTRA
In section 7 in sub-section (3), after clause (d) the following clauses shall be inserted, namely:-

"(d-1) he has practiced as an advocate or attorney for not less than seven years in the High Court, or any
court subordinate thereto, or any Industrial Court or Tribunal or Labour Court, constituted under any
law for the time being in force;

or
(d-2) he holds a degree in law of a University established by law in any part of India and is holding or has
held an office not lower in rank than that of a Deputy Registrar of any such Industrial Court or Tribunal
for not less than five years;

or" - Maharashtra Act No. 56 of 1974.

After clause (d-2), the following new clause shall be inserted, namely:-
"(d-3) he holds a degree in law of a University established by law in any part of India and is holding or
has held an office not lower in rank than that of Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the State
Government for not less than five years; or" - Maharashtra Act No. 22 of 1976.
PUNJAB (PRIOR TO AMENDMENT OF 1964)
In sub-section (3) of section 7 at the end of clause (b), the word 'or' and the following new clauses shall
be added, namely:-

"(c) he is or has been a District Judge; or

(d) he has held the office of the Chairman or any other member of the Labour Appellate Tribunal
constituted under the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act, 1950 or of any Tribunal, for a period
not less than two years." - Punjab Act No. 8 of 1957.

UTTAR PRADESH (PRIOR TO AMENDMENT OF 1964)

2. After sub-section (3) of section 7 the following shall be added as a new sub-section (3A)-

"(3A) In relation to an industrial dispute other than that referred in sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of section
2 or in section 4 of the Industrial Disputes (Banking and Insurance (Companies Act), 1949, the provisions
of sub-section (3) shall have effect as if-

(a) after clause (c), the following new clauses (d) and (e) had been added-

"(d) is or has been a Magistrate of the first class for a period exceeding two years."

"(e) is a person possessing more than two years practical experience of adjudicating or settling industrial
disputes."

(b) in the proviso after the words 'clause (b)' the words 'or clause (d) or clause (e)' had been added." -
Uttar Pradesh Act No. 25 of 1951.

WEST BENGAL
For clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 7, the following clause shall be substituted :-

"(b) he is, or has been, a District Judge or an Additional District Judge; or" - West Bengal Act, 35 of 1989.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. LABOUR AND INDUSTRIAL LAWS – S.N. MISHRA.

2. INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND LABOUR LAWS –

PIYUSH GOYAL.

3. LECTURES ON LABOUR LAW- DR. REGA SURYA

RAO.

ONLINE REFRENCES
# http://www.aaptaxlaw.com/industrial-disputes-act/section-7-industrial-disputes-act-labour-
courts-section-7-of-industrial-disputers-act-1947.html
# https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/industries/4-industrial-dispute-settlement-machineries-
for-settling-industrial-disputes-in-india/27993
#https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/industrial-disputes-2/causes-of-industrial-disputes-
labour-production-economics/29325
#https://www.managementstudyhq.com/causes-of-industrial-disputes.html