DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

!
2019-2020
LABOUR LAW
PROJECT

EFFICIENCY OF ADJUDICATION MACHINERY UNDER I.D.

ACT :- CRITICAL ANALYSIS
SUBMITTED FOR THE PROJECT WORK UNDERTAKEN IN THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT
OF B.A. L.L.B (HONS.) COURSE AT DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW
UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

DR. PRASENJIT KUNDU CHAITANYA

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (LAW) ENROLMENT NO. 047, SECTION “A”

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA BA.LLB. (HONS.), 6TH SEMESTER

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

Page 1! of 20
!
 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 3
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK BEHIND INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN INDIA 5
CAUSES OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES 7
1. Economic causes 7
2. Managerial causes 7
3. Political causes 8
CONSEQUENCES OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES 9
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MACHINERIES 10
1. Conciliation: 10
A. Conciliation Officer: 11

B. Board of Conciliation: 12

2. Court of Inquiry: 13
3. Voluntary Arbitration: 13
4. Adjudication: 14
A. Labour Court: 15

B. Industrial Tribunal: 15

C. National Tribunal: 16

CLOGS IN THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS 17

REFORMS REQIRED IN PRESENT STRUCTURE 19
CONCLUSION 20

Page 2! of 20
!
 INTRODUCTION

This Chapter deals with the different aspects of the adjudicatory authorities, viz., Labour Courts
(L.Cs.), Industrial Tribunals (I.Trs), and National Tribunals (N.T), as provided under the I.D. Act.
These adjudicatory bodies are specialised Tribunals functioning outside the hierarchy of ordinary
courts and are entrusted with the task of adjudication of industrial disputes. Al though, mainly they
have to adjudicate upon the disputes that are referred to them by the appropriate Governments, in
exceptional cases, the parties also may make applications to these bodies for adjudication of certain
claims.

The chief objective of the I.D.Act is to ensure peaceful settlement of industrial disputes through the
compulsory adjudication method as an alternative to strikes and lock-outs, which are inherent in the
process of collective bargaining. Compulsory adjudication may be considered as the soul of the
I.D.Act. Almost two-thirds of the provisions of the I.D. Act, as originally enacted, deal with the
adjudication machinery and the related aspects. It was rightly mentioned by in the book of “The
Laws of Industrial Dispute” that ‘‘the central theme of the Act is adjudication”1 . By and large,
adjudication of disputes for bringing about a mandatory settlement is resorted to as the ultimate
remedy for disputes unsettled through negotiation or conciliation.

Since the adjudication of disputes is to be undertaken at the initiative of the Government, without
any regard to the consent of the parties to the disputes, it is considered as compulsory adjudication

The concept of Compulsory adjudication was statutorily ushered in with a view to providing a
forum and compelling the parties to resort to the forum for arbitration so as to avoid confrontation
and dislocation in industry. The Legislature considered it wise to arm the Government with the
power to compel the parties to resort to arbitration with a view to avoid confrontation or trial of
strength which are considered wasteful from national and public interest point of view. For assuring
uninterrupted production, peace and harmony in industrial relations is necessary.

The industrial field in India faced a serious setback during the 1970’s, when the jute industries in
Gujarat and West Bengal faced a national labour dispute. It was the first time after Independence,

1! O.P. Malhotra, The Laws of Industrial Disputes (1985), 4th Edition, Vol.I, P.16.

Page 3! of 20
!
the juries and the legislative experts thought of bringing up substantial amendments, to the labour
laws.
The statute for adjudicating labour dispute, shall be evaluated periodically. In India, the substantial
period is over, after the introduction of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947, but has not undergone any
changes in its adjudication machinery. The very crux of industrial relation is a speedy Redressal of
probable industrial dispute. The effectiveness of adjudication process thus, shall be necessarily
reviewed and restructured. The labour law, which was in existence in the neighboring countries,
including the Great Britain has been reformulated before, through decades. But, the Labour Law in
India is flowing, as it is for the past 68 years. The ageing of the Industrial Dispute Act, with
substantial changes in the work pattern of adjudication machineries, will cause many hardships to a
healthy labour climate in the State.

Part III of the Constitution of India, provides a Fundamental Right for all citizens in India, to carry
on any profession, trade or business of their own. These rights inter alia provide, a right to approach
the courts for its evaluation. The adjudication process under industrial laws, provides condition
precedents for approaching the courts. The mandatory provision for reference, by appropriate
government was placed as an incident of legislative control, over the judicial process. By the
introduction of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, recognized arbitration process came into
existence, even in labour fields. The effect of this law is badly affecting the work pattern of the
adjudication machinery.

Page 4! of 20
!
 THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK BEHIND INDUSTRIAL
DISPUTES IN INDIA

Three important pieces of legislation have played a major role in shaping industrial relations in
India: 1) the Trade Unions Act of 1926, 2) the Industrial Employment “Standing Orders” Act of
1946, and 3) the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947.

The Trade Unions Act of 1926 deals with the formation and registration of trade unions, but does
not deal with recognition of unions by employers for the purpose of collective bargaining.2

The Industrial Employment “Standing Orders” Act of 1946 provides rules and regulations
governing the general terms and conditions of employment between the employer and the
employee. Employers and employees must agree on a set of rules and regulations governing the
contractual employer/employee relationship.3 The main purpose of the Act is to ensure that certain
minimum standards of employment will be maintained without a weak labor movement having to
fight for them.

The Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 governs industrial dispute resolution procedures. The basic
assumption in the acts is that the union is weak and will continue to be weak; the legislation is
intended to supplement the effort of a weak labor movement in its dealings with the employer4.The
Industrial Disputes Act (which shall be the major focus in this article) applies to a variety of
establishments.
The definition of the term “industrial establishment” is used in the widest possible sense, bringing
almost all economic activity within the ambit of the Act.he Act applies to all “workmen” employed
in these industries, but does not apply to employees employed in a supervisory capacity and
drawing more than 1,600 rupees per month or employees whose work is supervisorial or

2 Trade Unions Act (Act XVI of 1926), 33 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 689 (1979) (any seven people may join to form a
trade union)

3 Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act (Act XX of 1946), 23 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 84 (1979).

4 S. NAGARAJU, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SYSTEM IN INDIA 277-78 (1981)


Page 5! of 20
!
administrative in nature. The definition of “workman” does not make it clear whether supervisors
are actually covered by the Act, and recent court decisions have given conflicting opinions
regarding their status.5 Employers tend to adopt the view that supervisors drawing less than 1,600
rupees per month are “workmen” for the purposes of the Act. However, the broad coverage of the
Act makes it one of the most widely applied acts in the country.
While the Act has been basically enacted for “the investigation and settlement of industrial
disputes,”6 there has been some controversy about what constitutes an industrial dispute, despite the
Act’s expansive definition. Specifically, one dilemma focused upon whether an individual could
raise an industrial dispute, since the Act uses the term “workmen”.7 A subsequent amendment to the
Act provided that individuals could raise industrial disputes only when the dispute was connected
with the discharge, dismissal, termination or retrenchment of an individual worker

5 The term “workman” has been defined as any person engaged in any industry, “to do any skilled or unskilled manual,
supervisory, technical or clerical work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be expressed or implied.”
Industrial Disputes Act (Act XIV of 1947) § 2(s), 22 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 590 (1979). This definition does not apply
to members of the armed forces, the police service or employees of prisons. Id. Furthermore, this definition does not
include those employees who are employed in a supervisory capacity drawing wages exceeding 1600 rupees, or who, by
the nature of the duties assigned to him, functions mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity. Id.

6See Industrial Disputes Act (Act XIV of 1947) preamble, 22 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 590 (1979); see also P. MALIK,
THE INDUSTRIAL LAW 449 (1966).

7Industrial dispute has been defined as “any dispute or differences between employers and employees, employers and
workmen, workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment, nonemployment or terms of employment
or the conditions of labor of any person.” Industrial Disputes Act (Act XIV of 1947) § 2A (as amended), 22 INDIA
A.I.R. MANUAL 590 (1979).


Page 6! of 20
!
 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 division of labour; (b) it is a group activity; (c) it is carried
under control. Broadly speaking, 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 rationalisation and automation, faulty retrenchment system, leave and so
on. Low wages, irrespective of rising prices, demand for a rise in D.A., intolerable working and
living conditions, issues pertaining to hours 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:
- Inter union rivalries,
- Economic and political environment that exercise adverse effects on workers attitudes, and
- Indiscipline amongst workers.

2. Managerial causes
Some of the causes of discontent are inherent in the industrial system, itself such as:
- Workers do not get any opportunity for self-expression; or
- Their social needs are not fulfilled; that is. the position of workers within in informal groups
formed in industrial undertaking and problems of conflict within the groups may not be taken
into account.
- 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 may
assume serious dimensions. The other managerial factors responsible for industrial unrest have
been as
- Mental inertia on the part of management and labour.
- Management's general attitude of hatred towards their workers,
- Lack of competence on the supervisor and other managers in human relations.

Page 7! of 20
!
- Management's desire to pay comparatively lesser amount of bonus or dearness allowance against
the desire of workmen.
- Efforts to introduce modernization without prior or appropriate environment.
- Excessive work load and inadequate welfare facilities.
- Defective policy of lay-off.
- Denial of the workers right to recognize union.
- Unfair practices like victimization or termination of services without assigning any reasons.
- Lack of definite wage policy and stabilization of prices.
- Lack of a proper policy of union
- Denial of worker's right to organise, etc.

3. Political causes
Industrial disputes are pertly political also. Some important political strikes are 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, 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.

Page 8! of 20
!
 CONSEQUENCES OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES

Industrial law is no exception to the shifting emphasis of the modern law towards statutory law. The
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is therefore, the matrix, the charter, as it were, to the industrial law.
This Act other analogous State statutes provide machinery for regulating the rights of employers
and employees to lock-outs strikes and foster investigation 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

- 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.

- Loss of Output: Loss of output in an industry which is directly affected by a dispute, but other
industries are also affected adversely, as stoppage of work in one industry checks activity in other
industries too.

- 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 service largely used in the products of other industries.

- 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.

- Increase in indebtedness: This increases the indebtedness among the workers and not only the
old debts become heavier but fresh debts may also be incurred.

Page 9! of 20
!
- Loss of health of family members: The workers and their family members also suffer from loss
of health due to mental warrious resulting from loss of wages.
- 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.

- 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.

- Bad effect on labour relations: Strikes and lockouts bring bad effects on industrial
relations. 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.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MACHINERIES

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.

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

Page 10
! of 20
!
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 officers8 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.9

A. 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. Conciliation is an art
where the skill, tact, imagination and even personal influence of the conciliation officer affect his

8 In actual fact, Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act does not specify that conciliation should be completed within
fourteen days, but only provides that the conciliation officer should submit his report of results within fourteen days of
the commencement of conciliation proceedings. Sending the report does not impose any bar on the continuation of the
conciliation proceedings. Industrial Disputes Act (Act XIV of 1947) § 12, 22 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 590 (1979).

9 Industrial Disputes Act (Act XIV of 1947) S 22, 23, 22 INDIA A.I.R. MANUAL 590 (1979). 


Page 11
! of 20
!
success. The Industrial Disputes Act, therefore, does not prescribe any procedure to the followed by
him.
The conciliation officer is required to submit his report to the appropriate government along with
the copy of the settlement arrived at in relation to the dispute or in case conciliation has failed, he
has to send a detailed report giving out the reasons for failure of conciliation.
The report in either case must be submitted within 14 days of the commencement of conciliation
proceedings or earlier. But the time for submission of the report may be extended by an agreement
in writing of all the parties to the dispute subject to the approval of the conciliation officer.
If an agreement is reached (called the memorandum of settlement), it remains binding for such
period as is agreed upon by the parties, and if no such period is agreed upon, for a period of six
months from the date on which the memorandum of settlement is signed by the parties to the
dispute, and continues to be binding on the parties after the expiry of the period aforesaid, until the
expiry of two months from the date on which a notice in writing of an intention to terminate the
settlement is given by one of the party or parties to the settlement.

B. 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.

Page 12
! of 20
!
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 of inquiry, like labor courts and industrial tribunals, has powers equivalent to those of a civil
court.10 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.

10The powers of a civil court that are shared by the labor courts, the courts of equity and the industrial tribunals are: 

enforcing the attendance of a person and examining him under oath; compelling the production of documents and
material objects; and issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses. 


Page 13
! of 20
!
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.11 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 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.

11Generally, only one arbitrator is used. Occasionally, however, it becomes very difficult for both management and
labor to agree on one neutral arbitrator. Consequently, they select two arbitrators who then select a third one to act as an
“umpire.” The decision of the third arbitrator is final if the other two do not agree. Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules,
1957, reprinted in 2 V. SUBRAMANIAN, supra note 13, at 187. 


Page 14
! of 20
!
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.

A. 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.12
The issues referred to a labour court may include:
- The propriety or legality of an order passed by an employer under the Standing Orders.
- The application and interpretation of Standing Orders.
- Discharge and dismissal of workmen and grant of relief to them.
- Withdrawal of any statutory concession or privilege.
- Illegality or otherwise of any strike or lockout.
- 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:
- Wages including the period and mode of payment.
- Compensatory and other allowances.

12The second schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act deals only with the following matters:

the propriety or legality of an order passed by the employer under the “Standing Orders”;

the application and interpretation of “Standing Orders”;


Page 15
! of 20
!
- Hours of work and rest intervals.
- Leave with wages and holidays.
- Bonus, profit sharing, provident fund and gratuity.
- Shift working otherwise than in accordance with the standing orders.
- Rule of discipline.
- Rationalisation.
- Retrenchment.
- Any other matter that may be prescribed.13

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”.14
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.

13 N. PRASAD, THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES (AMENDED) ACT 58-59 (1964).


14 N. PRASAD, THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES (AMENDED) ACT 58-59 (1964)


Page 16
! of 20
!
 CLOGS IN THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS

- Quasi-Judical nature of Adjudication machineries

The Constitution of India declares that, all judicial functions shall be done independently, by the
judiciary. The existence of quasi judicial forums, through the process of delegation by the
legislature, causes many obstacles for protecting the civil rights of the employees. The main
shortcome precipitated that relates to the arbitrary control of the appropriate government, in the
adjudication process, relating to industrial disputes. Among the various conclusions drawn up, the
vital was the one which advocates the necessity of an independent judicial system. Enhancement of
the number of presiding officers. With appropriate skills, modification of industrial policy with
much concern for the absolute protection of the employees, were the significant responses evolved
from the study.
Part III of the Constitution of India, provides a Fundamental Right for all citizens in India, to carry
on any profession, trade or business of their own. These rights inter alia provide, a right to approach
the courts for its evaluation. The adjudication process under industrial laws, provides condition
precedents for approaching the courts. The mandatory provision for reference, by appropriate
government was placed as an incident of legislative control, over the judicial process. By the
introduction of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, recognized arbitration process came into
existence, even in labour fields. The effect of this law is badly affecting the work pattern of the
adjudication machinery.

- adjudication of industrial disputes, in particular interests disputes, requires also a “ non

judicial” bent of mind while officers administering civil justice are prone to be precedent
oriented, technical, traditional and impervious
“The qualifications prescribed for a person to be eligible to be appointed as the presiding officer of
the Labour Court are such as would almost make it impelling necessity to select persons from civil
judiciary and therein lies the potentiality for spill over of all the technicalities, dilatoriness and
formal approach quite evident in administration of civil justice, and it would be too much to be
expected from the persons drawn from civil judiciary. If in their journey through life as judges, they
were accustomed to find out what the contract is and sincerely believed that parties must be held to
their own contracts, it would be expecting too much from them to say that when taking up industrial

Page 17
! of 20
!
adjudication they will be looking at the unfairness of contracts and devise what contract ought to be,
that is, what ought to be a fair relation between the employer and the workmen.

- Absence of specialist courts in the real sense for expeditious disposal of disputes
The present structures did not satisfy the requirements of specialist tribunals as the only
qualification prescribed is the requisite judicial experience, and knowledge of industrial relations,
Labour problems or even of Labour laws is not a prerequisite .It is not an exaggeration, but a fact
known to all concerned, that often times District Judges, who did not even study labour laws as one
of the subjects in their LL.B. and consequently have very little knowledge of labour laws are
appointed as presiding officers of labour tribunals. They actually start learning the labour laws from
then on from the advocates appearing before them and by reading the relevant portions of statutes
and judgments cited by the advocates. It is also true in many cases that by the time the presiding
officer acquire a reasonable knowledge of the relevant laws; he is transferred back to the civil
judiciary.

- Labour courts as an appendage of the main Judicial system

The present adjudication mechanisms, such as labour courts and industrial tribunals, which were
charged with the duty of expeditious adjudication of industrial disputes, for ensuring social justice
and Industrial peace, have been functioning as sub-system, of the main Judicial system.
Consequently, all the defects and drawbacks of the judicial system in the country, have infiltrated
into the industrial adjudication. These drawbacks, abnormal delays, mounting arrears, the excessive
cost of litigations procedural technicalities and court formalities, etc. have made the adjudication
system ineffective and inefficient.

- Absence of appeal over the awards of the adjudicatory forums

As the matters stand at present, there is no appeal over the awards of the adjudicatory forums, and
where the statute does not provide for even one appeal writ petitions against the awards of
adjudicatory authorities are generally entertained on the plea that there is no alternative efficacious
remedy.

- The system discourages vigorous bilateral collective bargaining because the parties tend to
rely on the easily available alternative of government sponsored conciliation.

Page 18
! of 20
!
 REFORMS REQIRED IN PRESENT STRUCTURE

- There’s need for rationalization of existing laws relating to labour in organized sector;
- To suggest an umbrella legislation for ensuring a minimum level of protection to the workers in
the unorganised sector;
- That it is necessary to provide a minimum level of protection to managerial and other employers
too, against unfair dismissals or removals. This has to be brought adjudication by Labour Court
or Labour Relation Commission or Arbitration; That all these laws are judicially constituted into
a single law called the Labour Management Relations;
- That the changes in the labour laws be accompanied by a well-defined social security package
that will benefit all workers, be they in the organized or unorganised sector and should also cover
those in administrative managerial and other categories which have been excluded from the
purview of the term worker .
- Between arbitration and adjudication, the better of the two and would like, the system of
arbitration to become the accepted mode of determining dispute which is not settled by parties
themselves.
- A system of Labour Courts, Lok - Adalaths and Labour Relation Commission is the integral
adjudicatory system in labour matters.
- System of Lok Adalaths by the commission to be pursued to settle disputes speedily.
- The Tribunals must be given express power to grant interim relief and the power to execute the
awards by following simple procedures through a suitable statutory amendment
- The power to award costs can be more advantageously be used by the Tribunals to restrict the
number of adjournments.
- The power to grant interim relief may be exercised more frequently so that the employers would
be under some pressure to co-operate with the Tribunal for expeditious disposal of the cases.
Since the Tribunals have no power to grant interim stay orders against even patently illegal
orders of employers, the power to grant interim relief can be used as an alternative.
- Need of decentralisation in the system of administration of industrial justice. As it would ensure
specialist courts in the real sense and the consequent expeditious disposal of cases and
controversies coming up before the tribunals manned by specialists.

Page 19
! of 20
!
 CONCLUSION

This project is designed to be an informative guide to the practical aspects of industrial dispute
settlement in India. By providing the reader with information regarding the legal framework of
industrial relations laws, this article should prove helpful to those firms which are contemplating the
establishment of businesses or factories in India and also the salient features of the dispute
settlement process.

It also demonstrates the salient weaknesses of Indian labor legislation. First, the legislation allows
for a multiplicity of unions thereby resulting in an intense inter union rivalry that generates a large
number of industrial disputes. Second, the dispute resolution machinery has increasingly failed to
bring about timely agreements and reduce the number of workdays lost due to work stoppages.
Finally, there seems to be a need to encourage parties to use collective bargaining, rather than rely
on third party dispute resolution.

The perusal of structures, procedures and jurisdictions of adjudicatory authorities under I.D.Act
reveals that the participatory model tripartite body i.e, one independent judicial person as chairman
and two others representing employers and workmen, has many advantages. This model based upon
the principle of “participatory justice” will provide solutions to many drawbacks from which the
labour adjudication system is suffering at present. In addition to infusing more confidence in the
parties that justice will be done, the body can be more informal and less technical with minimum
procedural formalities. The representation on the body from employers and workmen would ensure
that the problem is deliberated from points of view of both parties. This would also ensure that the
main objective of expeditious and effective settlement of disputes is realised.

Whether the Indian government will introduce these changes is yet unknown. However, there is a
feeling of optimism in the country, in the wake of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s initiation of
sweeping economic and administrative reforms which are designed to attract foreign investment,
stimulate local investments and remove much of the bureaucratic hurdles to initiating new
industries. It is only a matter of time before the current industrial relations laws receive increased
attention, since the labor relations climate also plays an important role in the decision of foreign
investors to establish industries in India.

Page 20
! of 20
!