Back
VIVEK RUSIA, GAJENDRA SINGH
Aditya Birla Real Estate Ltd Previously Known As Century Textiles And Industries Led. – Appellant
Versus
Shramik Janata Sangh – Respondent
ORDER :
Vivek Rusia, J.
Regard being had to the similitude to the controversy involved in the present cases, with the joint request of the parties, both these petitions are finally heard and decided by this common order. Facts are being taken from Misc. Petition No.6022 of 2024.
2. Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by order dated 16.10.2024 passed by Industrial Tribunal, Indore in case No.11/ID/2024, whereby an application filed under Section 36(3) & (4) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as “I.D. Act”) by respondent No.1 has been decided against the petitioners. The respondents No.2 & 3 (in this writ petition) have also challenged the order dated 16.10.2024 as well as the order dated 22.10.2024 by way of Misc. Petition No.6648 of 2024.
3. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act having its registered office at Century Bhawan, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai. Previously the petitioner was known as Century Textiles & Industries Ltd. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacturing and sale of denim and century yarn from its unit situated at Village and Post Satrati, District Khargone (M.P.). The petitioner has sold its un
The rights of representation under Sections 36(1) and (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act are unconditional and independent of the conditions in Section 36(4).
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 prevails over the Advocates Act, requiring express consent and court leave for legal representation in industrial disputes.
The denial of legal representation in Labour Court undermines fair trial rights; courts must interpret Section 36(4) of the ID Act liberally to ensure equality between parties.
The judgment emphasized the need to consider implied consent and award litigation expenses to permit legal representation before Labour Courts under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947....
Consent previously given for legal representation cannot be revoked merely due to a change of advocate, ensuring fair representation in labor disputes.
The court upheld the principle of collective bargaining, ruling that workmen represented by a union cannot independently file claims against their union, ensuring industrial peace and effective repre....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the impact of the Allahabad High Court judgment declaring Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 unconstitutional on the case and th....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
