EFFICACY OF INDIAN TRIBUNALS IN

RESOLVING INDUSTRIAL AND TRADE

DISPUTES

Introduction:

The labour problems are associated with industries and the industrialization. The concern of
the State in issues of labours is the result of its commitments to secure the enthusiasm of
Industrial community, while simultaneously cultivating financial development in practically
all nations. State has assumed the power to govern and control labour relations in some
degree or the other. In few matters, it has appeared that the State has laid down principles or
recognition by employers and labourers; in others, the rules have covered more extensive
zone of these aspects. Most definitely, State intercession in labour matter can be followed
back to the establishment of the Employers and Labourers’ Disputes Act 1860 which
accommodated the quick removal of the debate identifying with the wages of labourers
occupied with railroads, trenches and other open works, by Magistrates. After World War-1
nonetheless, State mediation in Dispute Resolution turned out to be increasingly orderly and
viable. The long term trends in industrial conflicts may be interpreted in terms of the factors
and events that have occurred in the political process, certain developmental factors such as
the region in which the industry is located, techno-economic factors such as labour intensive
or capital intensive industries, the sector in which the industry is operating, and the type of
issues that have dominated some time or the other. These issues and factors makes it evident
that there are various weaknesses of Indian labour legislation.

Statutory Definition of “Industrial Dispute” and “Trade Dispute”

The Trade Unions Act, 1926 and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defined the terms 'trade
dispute' and the 'industrial dispute'. In spite of the fact that the terminologies daintily vary, a
definitive article and the substance of both the definitions are one and same.

According to The Trade Unions Act, 1926 and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 “Trade
Dispute” and “any dispute or difference between employers and employers or between
employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen which is connected with the

1|Page
employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour
of any person”.1

According to The Trade Unions Act, 1926, “Trade Dispute” means “any dispute between
employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen or between employers and
employers which is connected with employment or non-employment or the terms of
employment or the conditions of labour of any person and ‘workmen’ means all persons
employed in trade or industry whether or not in the employment of the employer with whom
the trade dispute arises.”2

Causes and Consequences of Industrial Disputes

There is an intrinsic clash in both the enthusiasm of capital and the work. Both are corner to
corner inverse. The political way of thinking winning in the general public additionally has
an effect on work issues. Popularity based way of thinking drives men to anticipate that the
general public should treat them politically equivalent and furthermore access to rise to
monetary chances. Other than the wages certain mental issues like pride of occupation,
vanity, feeling of significance, better working environment, better wellbeing offices,
instructive and recreational offices and so on assumed significant position in labour
expectations. Thus the expectations of the labourers from the capital are ever raising and vary
from society to society, nation to nation and time to time and rely upon socio, financial and
political wave present in a specific locale. Concessions allowed to labourers in a single
industry are being requested by the labourers of different businesses thus in one nation are
being requested in different nations. Labour issues established a genuine hazard to the
Society, and required arrangement, in the event that not to annihilate, at that point at any rate
to moderate them in the earliest reference point. Employers gave their sole consideration to
the upkeep of machines and the improvement of the specialized expertise to the express
disregard of the human hands utilized to man the machines since they were promptly
accessible and could be easily replaced. Along these lines the labour issues achieve global
character. There is no distinct arrangement that can be applied in settling the work issues as
they are heterogeneous and dynamic in nature. Both the labour and capital need to work
under a similar rooftop. It is idealistic to expect strife free mechanical society. Here the

1
See Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
2
See Section 2(h) of the Trade Unions Act, 1926.

2|Page
meaning of the term 'modern question' accomplishes significance with the object of settling
and to keep up mechanical harmony and concordance.

Interpretation of “Trade Dispute” and “Industrial Dispute” laid down by the

Courts

In the case of Shambu Nath Goyal v. Bank of Baroda,3 the Supreme Court held that the term
‘industrial dispute’ suggests a genuine and generous distinction having some component of
persistency and coherence till settled and likely if not changed in accordance with jeopardize
industrial peace of the undertaking or community. At the point when gatherings are at
fluctuation and the question or contrast is associated with employment or non-employment or
with the states of labour, there appear a industrial dispute.

Again in the case of Fedders Lloyd Corporation Ltd. v. Lt Governor,4 the Delhi High Court
held that to bring an industrial dispute into existence the party raising the dispute should
initially make an interest on the other party along these lines allowing the other party a
chance to either acknowledge or dismiss the interest. Allowing a chance to consider the
interest is extremely fundamental for bringing into reality any industrial dispute. The interest
should nonetheless, be raised on the administration of the foundation and dismissed by them.
Creation of such interest to conciliation official and its correspondence by the appeasement
official to the administration, who dismiss the equivalent is not adequate to establish an
industrial dispute.

Regarding Parties to a Dispute, the Indian Judiciary in many cases has held that the dispute
has to be between the employers and workmen or between workmen and workmen or
between employers and employers. The articulation ‘workmen’ utilized demonstrates that the
‘dispute’ or ‘difference’ must have a network of intrigue that is the entire collection of
‘workmen’ as a power or atleast dominant part of ‘workmen’ are keen on goals of the
‘dispute’ or the ‘difference’. In the case of Workmen of Sri Ranga Vilas Motors (P) Ltd v. Sri
Ranga Vilas Motors (P) Ltd,5 the Supreme Court held that when an individual dispute is
espoused by the union it (individual dispute) becomes an 'industrial dispute'. Further the apex
Court in News Papers Ltd.v. U.P State6, Industrial Tribunal observed that it is not necessary
that a registered body of workmen (union) should sponsor a workman's case and in
3
(1978)2 SCC 353.
4
AIR 1970 Delhi 60.
5
AIR1 967 SC 1040.
6
AIR 1960 SC 1328.

3|Page
Associated Cement Co. v. Their Workmen 7 further it was observed that a minority union or
minority group of workmen can also raise an 'industrial dispute'.

Conclusion:
Industrial conflict is one of the pieces of the industrial relation framework. The development
of disputes is giving an awful sign not exclusively to the businesses yet in addition to the
country on the loose. Subsequently, in light of a legitimate concern for the labourers,
businesses, society and the country both the labourers and the administration need to
comprehend the circumstance and attempt to limit their contention at the most minimal level.

7
AIR 1960 SC 111.

4|Page