1. Claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act — Service termination during pendency (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2000 Supreme(SC) 1872
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.N.Variava : S.R.Babu
English Electric Company Of India Limited
Versus
V.Manohara Rao
Case No. : 856 , 873 of 1994
Date of Decision : 11/22/00
Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act applies only during the pendency of a proceeding relating to an industrial dispute. It is not applicable to proceedings under Section 33-C(2), as a claim petition for recovery of money is not an industrial dispute.
Headnote:(A) Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 33, 33-A and 33-C(2) - Termination of service during pendency of claim petition - Applicability of Section 33-A - Provisions of Section 33-A are attracted only during the pendency of any proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute - A claim petition filed under Section 33-C(2) does not constitute an industrial dispute - Consequently, Section 33-A is not applicable when services are terminated during the pendency of proceedings under Section 33-C(2). (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The respondents filed a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act seeking the difference in wages paid to permanent workmen and themselves. During the pendency of this petition, their services were terminated. The respondents filed a complaint under Section 33-A, alleging that the termination during the pendency of the Section 33-C(2) proceedings amounted to an unfair labour practice. The Labour Court ruled in favor of the respondents, directing their reinstatement with back wages and other benefits.
Findings of Court:
The Labour Court failed to distinguish between proceedings concerning an industrial dispute and a claim petition under Section 33-C(2). Since the latter is not an industrial dispute, the restrictions on termination imposed by Section 33-A do not apply.
Issues: Whether the termination of services during the pendency of a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act attracts the provisions and protections of Section 33-A of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a plain reading of Sections 33 and 33-A reveals that these provisions are only attracted during the pendency of a proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute. A claim petition under Section 33-C(2) is not an industrial dispute; therefore, Section 33-A cannot be invoked to challenge the termination of services occurring during such proceedings.
Result: Appeals allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Termination during pendency of Section 33-C(2) proceedings amounts to unfair labour practice under Section 33-A (Para 1 )
3. Section 33-A applies only during pendency of proceedings in respect of an industrial dispute, not a Section 33-C(2) claim (Para 2 )
4. Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act applies only during pendency of an industrial dispute, not a Section 33-C(2) claim (Para 2 )
5. Appeal allowed — Labour Court order set aside (Para 2 )
6. Does Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act apply during the pendency of a Section 33-C(2) claim petition?
No, Section 33-A applies only during the pendency of proceedings in respect of an industrial dispute, not a Section 33-C(2) claim petition. (Para 2 )
S.RAJENDRA BABU, J.
(1) THE respondents filed a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming difference in the wages paid to the permanent workmen and to the respondents. During pendency of the said claim petition the services of the respondents were terminated on 16-10-1991. A complaint is made under Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act ("the Act" for short) on the ground that during pendency of the proceedings filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Act the appellant has effected termination of services which amounts to unfair labour practice. On that basis the Labour Court held that the services of the respondents could not have been terminated and they were directed to be reinstated till the disposal of the claim petitions with back wages and other benefits. Against this order these appeals are preferred.
(2) A plain reading of Sections 33 and 33-A of the Act will make it clear that it is only during the pendency of any proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute the provisions of Section 33-A would be attracted and not otherwise. There was no industrial dispute but a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Act was pending. This aspect was totally lost sight of by the Labour Court in dealing with this matter and, therefore, we allow this appeal and set aside the order made by the Labour Court. The appeals are allowed accordingly.
