book Review

Dedicated to Social Justice

N G R Prasad

his book is the result of the joint efforts of two authors, Sharath Babu
and Rashmi Shetty, who are academically qualified and also possess rich
experience in the field of labour studies.
The book is not just a sectionwise commentary on various provisions of the
Industrial Disputes (ID) Act, 1947 and
other sister enactments. The authors have
divided the chapters on industrial law
subjectwise and discussed the leading
case laws falling under each subject. The
landmark cases of Krishna Iyer and
other learned judges find a place on the

28

Social Justice and Labour Jurisprudence:

Justice V R Krishna Iyers Contributions
by Sharath Babu and Rashmi Shetty; Sage Publications,
New Delhi, 2007; pp 576.

relevant subjects. They have extensively

quoted from these landmark cases and
analysed them from the perspective of
labour jurisprudence. In analysing and
presenting these subjects the authors
have shown a definite perception of law,
its destiny and its role in the social
dynamics of providing a new deal to the
working class.

In the preface, the authors have stated

that the purpose of their work is to make
clear certain key aspects of industrial relations in India, to those within the country
and to the outside world, with a view to
impressing upon the reader that the labour
laws are not harsh but humane, oriented
towards a protective mechanism for the
economically weaker sections of this vast
country. This makes the book both instructive and interesting. They have measured
up to this promise by citing the relevant
landmark cases decided by the apex court.

Issues under the Act, 1947

In the chapter dealing with Threshold Part
Issues under the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947, the authors have presented important definitions under the act, viz, industry, workman, industrial dispute and
march 22, 2008 EPW Economic & Political Weekly

book Review

award. Here the authors refer extensively

to the seven-judge bench landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in A Rajappas
case, otherwise known as Bangalore
Water Supply case. It was a judgment in
which Krishna Iyer indeed played a radical role, of course, within the constitutional
parameters. They refer to the zigzag pronouncements in the Gymkhana Club case,
the Solicitors case and the Hospital Mazdoor Sabha case and conclude by saying as
to how the Bangalore Water Supply case
judgment rightly puts an end to the ple
thora of unending controversies. The authors have shown a keen understanding of
political history and the value system in
our courts when they describe the impact
of the new political economy on Bangalore
Water Supply case and the attempts made
by the Supreme Court to dilute it by a fivejudge bench judgment seeking a reference
of this case to a larger bench. The authors
have taken exception to the five-judge
bench judgment seeking a reference on
account of an apparent conflict between a
three-judge bench and two-judge bench
decision. Under the heading Ravage the
authors pose a pertinent question, Is this
exercise by the apex court really necessary
at this stage? The constitutional philo
sophy of the authors comes to the fore in
this question.

On US Inclination
It is appropriate to mention the powerful
preface of Krishna Iyer at this stage. He
quotes from Griffith on the politics of the
judiciary that, judges are the product of a
class and have the characteristics of that
class. It is interesting to read in the pre
face a reference to Winston Churchill saying in the House of Commons, Where
class issues are involved it is impossible to
pretend that the courts command the
same degree of general confidence. On the
contrary, they do not, and a very large
number of our population have been led to
the opinion, that they are, unconsciously,
no doubt, biases.
Krishna Iyer, with remarkable statesmanship, states that there is a tendency
especially after American capitalist influence has gained hold on Indian economic
philosophy of rejecting Nehru and Indira
Gandhi; but this trend must be corrected.
A majority of the judges brought up
Economic & Political Weekly EPW march 22, 2008

contrary to the views of the founding

fathers are inclined to ignore the progressive Preamble and the labour law set out
in Part IV of the Constitution, Industrial law,
after US economic domination of Indian
legal thought has reached the vanishing
point of social justice jurisprudence.
Krishna Iyer hopes that history in the long
run will rewrite the current pro-west verdict of the judiciary and will vindicate
what we, in our profound convictions,
dreamt Indias labouring people, in their
vast majority would make Indias one
billion and odd humans a happy family.
The book could not have been better
timed when pro-globalisation thought has
already invaded the executive and is
trying to permeate in the judgments of the
apex court. Therefore, a reading of the
book is a must for people who want to
reverse this trend.

Bilateralism
The chapter on collective bargaining
agreement, where the authors have extensively quoted from the judgment of the Supreme Court in the LIC vs Bahadur case,
shows a brilliant exposition by Krishna
Iyer on the importance of settlements,
their continuity and how they can be
replaced only by a settlement or award
under law. Krishna Iyer states that bilateralism and not unilateralism is the signature tune of industrial law and basis of industrial democracy. The Supreme Court
lays down that by taking recourse to the
provisions of LIC Act, the management
cannot deprive the employees of bonus
agreed to in a settlement under the ID Act,
thus giving industrial law its true place in
labour-management relationship. The authors have devoted considerable time and
attention to this important judgment, in
which the apex court took a little more
time, say a month, to deliver the judgment. Even here, Krishna Iyer explains the
delay by saying that they were trying to
reach a judicial consensus. Such is the notable role played by Krishna Iyer and it is
not surprising that the authors have spent
so much time, energy and learning in
bringing out this book containing his contributions.
In a short chapter devoted to the governments power of reference, the authors
have rightly picked up the Supreme Court

judgment in Avon Services case, decided

by Krishna Iyer and Desai. The judgment
makes it clear that when the power to
refer an industrial dispute is left to the
government, it does not mean that the
government loses its power, once the reference is declined. The judgment lays
down an important principle of social justice that there cannot be an administrative finality to social power affecting the
rights of the workers, in the matter of
access to courts.

On Retrenchment
Coming to the chapter on Lay-off and
Retrenchment, the authors have referred
to the famous case of SBI vs Sundara
money, where the Supreme Court for the
first time gave a broad interpretation to
the definition of retrenchment, which
brought a lot of protection to the workers
who were engaged with deliberate breaks
in service for more than 240 days in a calendar year without any compensation.
This judgment gave relief to a number of
workers who had been sent out without
even minimum statutory benefits. Krishna
Iyer remarks, The breakdown of the definition of Section 2(oo) expands the
semantics of retrenchment. Whatever
reason, every termination spells retrenchment, except, of course, those excluded by
the definition. The social justice and labour jurisprudence in keeping with the
Constitution come out prominently in this
judgment, where the learned judges observe that to protect the weak against the
strong, this policy of comprehensive definition has been effectuated. Repeated attempts by the powerful employers to see
that the scope of this judgment is
narrowed down, have failed.

Disciplinary Proceedings
In the chapter dealing with disciplinary
proceedings, there is a reference to the
Gujarat Steel Tubes case which dealt with
mass termination of employees who went
on strike, when the management did not
implement the wage board recommendations. Krishna Iyer, applying the principles
of social justice in the purposive interpretation of labour laws, held that an arbitrator appointed under Section 10-A of the
Industrial Disputes Act would also come
under the definition of tribunal and the

29

book Review

court could interfere even with such

awards under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Supreme Court
held that the high court can mould the relief to the workman under Article 226 instead of remanding the matter to the tribunal. In this connection, Krishna Iyer
observes, that, the remedy under Article
226 is extraordinary and is an Anglo Saxon vintage but it is not a carbon copy of
English processes. In this judgment it was
observed that the Constitution of India is
not a non-aligned parchment, but a partisan of social justice with a direction and
destination which it sets in the Preamble

30

and Article 38 and so, when we read the

evidence, the rulings, the statute and the
rival pleas, we must be guided by the
values set by the Constitution.
The authors have taken care to include
all the landmark judgments, particularly
the judgments of Krishna Iyer, which had
moulded labour jurisprudence of this
country. It becomes all the more relevant
today, when we are trying to slide back
to market economics and treat labour
as a mere commodity and not as a social
unit. The authors are anxious to point out
that this goes against the constitutional
promise and run of legal decisions so far.

Hence the urgent need for a book of this

kind. It is a must for students, trade
unionists, academicians, lawyers, judges,
and more particularly, the judges of the
Supreme Court, where we are noticing a
wind of change, and to the people in
public life. Though the book is priced
slightly on the higher side, it is worth the
price given the information. A paperback
edition may be necessary to be within the
reach of all. It will be a ready reference for
further studies on any topic in industrial
jurisprudence.
Email: ngprasad@yahoo.com

march 22, 2008 EPW Economic & Political Weekly