Course Coordinator

Mr. Jagdish Khobragade

Assistant Professor of Law

MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAGPUR

 Authorities under the Industrial Disputes
Act,1947

The following are the authorities specified under

the Industrial Dispute Act.

Works Committee.
Conciliation Officers.
Board of Conciliation.
Court of Inquiry.
Labour Court.
Industrial Tribunal.
National Tribunal.
Works Committee
Composition of works committee
Aims and objectives of Works Committee
Functions of Work Committee
Northbrook Jute Company Ltd And Another v.Their Workmen AIR1960 SC
87

Industrial Disputes Act, Ss. 3(b), 9A, 33, and 33A Works committee Function of
Workmen's representatives on the works committee agreeing to the introduction
of a scheme of rationalization resulting in increased workload and which was
likely to render some of the hands surplus -Such agreements, if binding on the
concerned workmen.
Industrial Disputes Act, Ss. 9A and 33A Notice of change for introducing a
scheme of rationalization given by the employer Dispute relating to the
justifiability of the proposed scheme of rationalization, referred for adjudication
pending such adjudication but after the expiry of the 21 days mentioned for the
notice of change, the employer attempting to introduce the scheme of
rationalization Such scheme likely to result in increase of workload and also
likely to render some of the workmen surplus Concerned workmen, refusing to
work as per the scheme.
Consequently the employer declaring lockout Employer, if contravened the
provisions of S. 33A of the Act in attempting to introduce the scheme of
rationalization Such action of the employer, it was prejudicial to the concerned
workmen Employer, in the circumstances, if bound to pay wages for the period
of lockout Refusal on the part of the concerned workmen not to work as per the
new scheme, if amounted to strike.
Northbrook Jute Company Ltd And Another v.Their Workmen AIR1960 SC
87

Held, (1) that the workmen's representatives on the Works Committee

represented the workmen only for the purpose of the functions of the Works
Committee and that the approval of the scheme of rationalisation by the Works
Committee was not binding on the workmen or their Union. Kemp and
Company Ltd. v. Their Workmen, [1955] 1 L.L.J. 48, approved.
(2) that the introduction of a rationalisation scheme was an alteration of
conditions of service to the prejudice of the workmen.
(3) that the alteration of conditions of service was made not when notice under
s. 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act was given but on December 16, when the
rationalisation scheme was put into operation, and that as it was done when
the reference was pending before the Tribunal, it was a contravention of s. 33 of
the Act.
(4) that the closure of the mills in the circumstances of this case by the
employer amounted to an illegal lock-out and that the workmen unable to work
in consequence of the lock-out were entitled to wages for the period of absence
caused by such lock-out.
Union of India & Anr. v. M.T.S.S.D. Workers Union & Ors, AIR1988 SC 633

The respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court for quashing the order
dated 31.1.1984 of the authorities, informing the respondent Union about the
scheme of election to the Works Committee to be constituted for the period
1984-86, on the basis of division in different constituencies under the Industrial
Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957, framed under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The High Court held that such a distribution of constituencies was not
permissible in view of the scheme of the Rules, especially Rules 39, 41. 42 and
43.
In the appeal by special leave, on behalf of the appellants it was contended that
such a division of constituencies to give appropriate representation to various
sections, groups and categories of workers, skilled, unskilled, clerical and
otherwise, was justified under Rule 39 and proviso to Rule 43.

On behalf of the respondents, it was contended that while Rule 42

contemplated only division in two constituencies, that is, those who were
members and those were not, of a registered trade union, it further provided
that where more than half the workers belonged to one registered trade union,
there was no need for any division of constituencies, and election will be only
by general vote of workers of the industry and, therefore, the High Court was
right in holding that the division of constituencies as contemplated in the
aforesaid order was not permissible. Dismissing the appeal.
Union Of India & Anr. V. M.T.S.S.D. Workers Union & Ors, AIR1988 SC 633

HELD: The scheme of the Industrial Disputes (Control) Rules, 1957 for the constitution
of Works Committee clearly provides that (a) where there is a registered trade union
having more than 5O per cent membership of the workers in that establishment, the
total number of members of the Works Committee will be elected without distribution of
any constituencies; and (b) if in an industry, no trade union registered under the Trade
Unions Act represents more than 50 per cent of the members, then only the election
will be held in two constituencies, one from the members of the registered trade union
or unions and the other from nonmembers of the trade unions and it is only in this
contingency, it is further provided that, if the employer thinks proper, may further sub
divide the constituency into department, section or shed.

When there is a registered trade union in an establishment, having more than 50 per
cent membership, the exercise under Rule 43 of the Industrial Disputes (Control)
Rules, 1957 is futile and is not called for.

In the instant case since the respondent union's membership is more than 50 per cent,
the distribution of constituencies under Rule 42 is not contemplated and, therefore,
there is no occassion for Rule 43 or proviso therein to come into operation.
Reasons of failure of Works Committee
 Recommendations of the National
Commission on Labour, 1969-
 The National Commission on Labour under the Chairmanship of
Justice Gajendragadkar in 1969 critically examined the pros and
cons of the Works Committee and finally recommended the
following points.
 A more responsive attitude on the part of the management.
 Adequate support from the unions.
 Proper appreciation of the scope and functions of the works
committees.
 Whole-hearted implementation of the recommendations of the
works committees; and
 Proper coordination of the functions of the
 multiple bipartite institutions at the plant level
#how to
write?