➢PROJECT:- DisPute resolution mechanism under

the industrial disPutes act 1947.

➢NAME:- NEERAJ KUMAR RAY.

➢SEMESTER:- 10(X)
➢ROLL NUMBER:- 53
➢SECTION:- A

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1|Page
 Acknowledgement………………………...……………………….….3

 Introduction……………………………………..…………..………….4
 Industrial Dispute Act,1947…………………………………………..4
 Dispute Redressal Bodies………………………………………………6
 Internal Mechanism of Settlement disputes under the
Industrial Dispute Act.............................................................................6
 Works Committee………………………………………………...6
 Grievance Redressal Committee……………………………….7
 External Mechanism of Settlement disputes under the
Industrial Dispute Act………..………………………………………...7
 Labour court……………………………………………………..9
 Industrial tribunal………………………………………………10
 National tribunal.………………………………………………11
 Court of inquiry……………………………………………………….11
 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………….11
 SUGGESTIONS……………………………………………………..12
 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………….13

 Acknowledgement

2|Page
I would like to express my special thanks of
gratitude to my Prof. Dr. Satish Chandra sir who
gave me the golden opportunity to do this project
on the topic DisPute resolution mechanism under the
Industrial DisPutes Act 1947. It helped me in doing a
lot of Research and I came to know about a lot of
things related to this topic.

 INTRODUCTION
A dispute arises for several reasons, the most common being the relation
between the labourers and their wages. It is the conflict of interests

3|Page
between two parties that give rise to a dispute. Traditionally speaking, the
employees have always been placed on the lower ladder of the society by
the employer presenting a dominating self-being in the position of
authority. An employee has the right to be provided with wages depending
on the amount of work he delivers. It is the responsibility on the part of the
employer to provide his employees with a reasonable amount of wages
along with other conditions that are necessary for a person to earn his
livelihood.
All disputes arising in an industry cannot be resolved in the same
manner and therefore comes the concept of the mechanism of settling
disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. It is a constant fight
against oppression on the part of those who are employed for providing
welfare among other sections of the society and not being subjected to
similar kind of welfare due to the authoritative rule on the part of the
employer. It is correct that the disputes settlement mechanisms can provide
relief for a temporary period only, these settlement mechanisms, if used
effectively, can provide long term services also. Therefore what is
necessary is the correct application of the mechanisms available for
settling disputes. 
 Industrial Dispute Act,1947
The Industrial Dispute Act,1947 regulates the labour law in India as far as
the same relates to trade unions.
  Section2(k) of the Act,1947 lays down the meaning of an industrial
dispute.The parties that can be involved in an industrial dispute includes
employers and workmen, two employees, employer and workmen. The
provision also lays down the grounds that need to be abided by in order to
term a dispute as an industrial dispute. These grounds are provided
hereunder:
(1):-The mere difference of opinion will not constitute an industrial
dispute instead of a factum of dispute will.
(2):-The date of commencement of the dispute should be provided in
writing by the union otherwise the same reference will be declared invalid.
(3):-The dispute should be such that it affects the well-being of the
majority of workmen and not a single work-man.
(4):-The dispute that has arisen should be in relation with an individual
workman or workmen in whom they being a body is or are interested in. 

4|Page
 To maintain a cordial relation between the employer and the employee,
the Act lays down settlement mechanisms as well that can be of some
help. The authorities on whom the Act confers authority to carry out
settlement and investigation purposes for an industrial dispute are
mentioned below:
1. Conciliation officer under Section 4 of the Act,1947.
2. Works committee under Section 3 of the Act,1947.
3. Labour court under Section 7 of the Act,1947.
4. Boards of conciliation under Section 5 of the Act, 1947.
5. Labour Tribunal under Section 7A of the Act, 1947.
6. National tribunal under Section 7B of the Act, 1947.

In the case of State of Bihar v. D.N.Ganguli, the Supreme Court decided

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

1. the disputes of termination, discharge, promotion of workmen,

security measures available to the workers, retirement benefits
come in.In the case of Central Provinces Transport Services Ltd.,
v. R.G. Patwardhan the court opined that if a dispute arises
between an employer and a workman, then that cannot be termed
as an industrial dispute unless the dispute is taken up by the trade
union or a collective group of workmen claiming that a legal
dispute has taken place. Therefore, in this case, the Supreme Court
extended its support towards the trade union so that an individual
dispute can be treated as an industrial dispute and settlement can
be done. 
2. Those disputes which involve a group of workmen whose rights
and interests have been contravened with by the employer. This
dispute is referred to as the most important industrial dispute

5|Page
 which if not resolved leads to a stoppage of work by the workers
that can be detrimental for the industry as a whole. 
3. It is another kind of industrial dispute. Disputes of rights are also
referred to as legal disputes that deal with the rights of the
workmen that are already existing. When there is a violation of the
legal rights of the workers, disputes arise regarding the same. 
The Act does not provide any provision for settling disputes by means
of bilateral negotiations. If the parties fail to negotiate mutually between
themselves then the only way of resolving an industrial dispute is by
adjudication on the reference of the appropriate government. Therefore the
role of voluntary arbitration is necessary on the basic grounds for the
parties involved in the dispute to resolve the same easily. If the same is not
done then there are also other ways of resolving the disputes. The best way
of resolving disputes is by means of collective bargaining which
symbolises plurality of workmen working in the industry. If collective
bargaining fails, then other mechanisms of settlement involve conciliation,
arbitration and voluntary arbitration. These methods are considered to be
the appropriate alternatives for collective bargaining. 
 Dispute Redressal Bodies:-
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has provided for the establishment of
both internal and external mechanisms to settle industrial disputes.

 Internal Mechanism

1:- Works Committee:-

Section (3) of the Act is statutorily mandatory in all industrial

establishments having a hundred or more workmen. It consists of
representatives of employees and workmen of an establishment. The
workmen’s representatives and employer representatives should be equal
in number. The object of the works committee is to provide for an internal
forum for dispute resolution as a precursor to litigation or external
mechanisms for dispute resolution.

2:- Grievance Redressal Committee:-

Section 9(c) of the Act requires the employer in every industrial
establishment in which fifty or more workmen are employed to provide for
a grievance settlement authority. Every industrial establishment consisting
of twenty or more workmen shall have one or more grievance redressal

6|Page
committees that shall be composed in equal proportion by members of
management and the workmen. The total number of members in the
committee shall not exceed six and shall include one female member if
feasible. The Grievance Redressal Committee shall complete its
proceedings within forty-five days after the receipt of a written complaint
by an aggrieved party. Any workman dissatisfied by the decision of the
committee may prefer to appeal against it. The employer is then obliged to
consider the appeal and dispose of the matter within one month from the
date of its institution and provide a copy of the decision to the aggrieved
employee.

 External Mechanism

Certain machinery is existing under the methods of settling industrial

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

1:- Collective Bargaining or Negotiation is one of the methods for

settlement of an industrial dispute. It plays significant role in promoting
labour management relations and in ensuring industrial harmony.
Collective Bargaining is a process/Method by which problems of wages
and conditions of employment are settled amicably, peacefully and
voluntarily between labour and management. In collective bargaining, the
parties to the dispute i.e., the employer and the employees/workmen settle
their disputes by mutual discussions and agreements without the
intervention of a third party. Such settlements are called "bipartite
settlement". Therefore, settlement of labour disputes by direct Negotiation
or settlement through collective bargaining is always preferable as it is the
best way for the betterment of labour disputes.
2:- One of the most familiar ways to carry out the settlement of
disputes under the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 is conciliation which
is also well-known by the name of mediation. It is not only restricted

7|Page
 to India but this method of dispute settlement is used all across the
world. Conciliation is the procedure in which there is an involvement
of a third party who provides assistance to the parties in dispute to
carry out negotiation between them. The two types of machinery that
are available for executing the conciliation functions are:

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

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

Section 4 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 lays down the function of a
conciliation officer which is to create a kindred atmosphere within the
industry which will help the parties to settle the disputes between them.
This is a function with an administrative nature and not a judicial one. 
A conciliation officer is required to hold proceedings, carry out
investigations regarding the dispute in a fair manner to help the parties
arrive at a settlement. They are appointed to regulate settlement disputes
for a specified area either for a temporary time period or permanently.
While Section 11 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 lays down the powers
vested upon a conciliation officer, Sections 12 and 13 are meant for
dealing with the duties of the conciliation officer. 
After the government agrees that there is a failure in the report, to his
satisfaction he can send the matter to the Board of Conciliation or any
other adjudicating body to look after the same. If such a step is not
preferred, then the government directly communicates the matter to the
parties involved in the dispute. The usage of conciliation as a settlement
dispute mechanism is indeed effective as have been revealed by the
statistical study. The parties while being a part of the conciliation
proceeding do not reveal the entire dispute matter with the thought that if
the proceedings are not effective enough to settle the dispute then the same
can be tried by other legal remedies that are available also. It is when the
conciliation officers are not able to handle the disputed matter, the matter
gets passed on to the tribunals. This is also cited as a reason for the failure
of conciliation.
3:- Section 10A of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 provides the provision
for voluntary arbitration which in a real-world is completely carried out by
adjudication. Arbitration and adjudication have a very thin line of
8|Page
difference between them. While in the former the judge is decided by the
parties involved in the dispute, whereas in the latter the judge is appointed
by the State. 
The origin of voluntary arbitration in India dates back to the issue of
plague bonus in the Ahmedabad Textile Mills under the leadership of the
father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi.To make voluntary arbitration
compulsory, The Trade Unions & Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill,
1988 was brought in laying down restrictions on legal strikes by the
employees. According to the bill, legal strikes can be carried out by the
parties only after either of the parties has rejected the offer of arbitration
that had been provided to the parties to settle the dispute. Although several
efforts have been put to effect by the Indian government, voluntary
arbitration still remains in shadows as have been reflected by the statistics.

4:- It is not that adjudication replaces conciliation totally but rather the
matter is if conciliation fails to settle the dispute between the parties in the
industry, adjudication takes charge in carrying out the job which the
conciliation mechanism was assigned to do. It is just another legal remedy
that can be adopted if the necessity arises. The ultimate remedy for
resolving an industrial dispute is by adjudication. 
Adjudication can also be termed as the compulsory settlement of the
industrial dispute in concern by labour courts, industrial tribunals, and
national tribunal as provided by the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. The
terms adjudication and arbitration have minute differences if placed in our
country. 
It is on the government to decide whether to refer to the party or not
before proceeding with the adjudication mechanism. If the parties are
involved by the government then that type of adjudication will be referred
to as voluntary adjudication. Whereas if the government does not feel it to
be necessary to involve the parties in the adjudication mechanism then that
kind of adjudication will be called compulsory adjudication. 
Adjudication of the industrial dispute will take place by a three-tier
system which will be inclusive of the following:
(a):-Labour court- The Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 under Section
7 provides for the constitution of a labour court. The appropriate
government in the form of notification in the official gazette can
lead to the constitution of a labour court for resolving the disputes
in an industry. The labour court consists of one person who is an

9|Page
 independent judge or a judge of the High court or the District
court. The judge can also be a former judge of the labour court
itself with an experience of about 5 years. The matters handled by
the labour court are provided in the second schedule of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 which consists of:

1. The legality in the order passed by the employer under the

orders that are standing.
2. The implications of the standing orders.
3. Granting of relief that should be available to the workmen in
the industry which has been dismissed from them.
4. Withdrawal of any privilege that a workman is subjected to
5. All matters other than that coming under the purview of the
industrial tribunal.

(b):-Industrial tribunal:- The provision for the industrial tribunal is

provided under Section 7A of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. One or
more industrial tribunals can be set up by the government according to
his desire with the courts being provided with wider jurisdiction in
comparison with the labour court. It is not to be considered as a
permanent body but body set up for temporary purpose for hearing on
an ad-hoc basis only. As the courts are having wider jurisdiction, the
issues that will be taken into consideration by the courts will also be
large in number. Broadly the issues handled by the industrial tribunal
have been listed below:

1:-Wages of the employee which included the mode of payment of

wages also.
2:-Bonus and provident funds that are provided
3:-Working hours of the employees
4:-Rationalisation
5:-Leaves that are granted to the employees inclusive of the wages
received and the holidays provided to them
6:-Rules associated with the maintenance of discipline in the industry
among the employees.
7:-Any other matter which may be considered to be heard and
discussed necessarily.

10 | P a g e
 (c):-National tribunal:- A national tribunal is formed by the Central
Government by an official gazette for adjudication of the industrial
disputes that are considered to be of national importance. Two
people according to the choice of the government are appointed to
the role of an assessor in the national tribunal. If a dispute between
two parties of an industry reaches the national tribunal, then both the
labour court and the industrial tribunal loses its jurisdiction over the
matter. 
5:-Court of inquiry:-
The remedy in the form of a court of inquiry was first provided by The
Trade Disputes Act, 1929 and was followed by the Industrial Dispute Act,
1947 also under Section 6. This mechanism of settling disputes has been
out of use in the country now.  As the government of India could not
figure out the benefit from this machinery in industrial dispute cases, the
machinery has been eliminated completely by The Trade Unions &
Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill, 1988 and is no more in use.  
 CONCLUSION:-
Despite a lot of loopholes in the system, the interference of the
Supreme Court and the High Courts have indeed been helpful in regulating
the statute governing the industrial dispute. Settlement disputes under the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is indeed a way in which the chaos associated
with industry can be removed. As India slowly develops with the
introduction of several industries, it has become necessary to ensure the
proper functioning of the industries in order to help develop the country
economically. For the same the Industries Dispute Act, 1947 plays an
essential role by not only providing the provisions as to how to regulate
the working of an industry but also laying down settlement mechanisms
that can help resolve disputes between the employee and employer.
Coordination of both can help industry run smoothly and effectively.
While the Act provides for both internal and external bodies for dispute
resolution and prevention of illegal strikes, lockouts and mitigates the use
of unfair labour practices, from a compliance perspective it is important to
have robust internal mechanisms that address disputes. External
mechanisms generally require a great deal of effort, expense and time
spent which generally leads to a soured relationship between employer and
employee. Thus, having internal mechanisms is preferable because the
likelihood of having to rely on adjudication or alternate dispute resolution

11 | P a g e
reduces thereby providing for an amicable working relationship which
ultimately leads to greater productivity.

 SUGGESTIONS:-
Some of the ways in which settlement machinery can function effectively
are listed hereunder:

1. The mechanism of conciliation should be regulated by the officers

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

 BIBLIOGRAPHY:-
12 | P a g e
1. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in
2. http://www.legalserviceindia.com
3. https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com
4. https://www.legalservice.com
5. https://www.legalbites.in
6. https://www.simliance.in
7. https://www.lawoctopus.in
8. https://www.wikipedia.com

13 | P a g e