Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
In cases where retired employees or associations of retired employees raise disputes, these are often held to be outside the scope of industrial disputes under Section 2(k), unless they involve ongoing employment or retrenchment during active service ["Retired Employees Association, ITC Ltd-ILTD Division, Guntur VS Govt. of A. P. - Andhra Pradesh"], ["Secretary / General Manager Chavda Vijaysinh Takhatsinh VS Dilipbhai Bhadabhai Chudasama - Gujarat"], ["HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED VS FOURTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - Calcutta"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED VS FOURTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - Calcutta"]- ["Retired Employees Association, ITC Ltd-ILTD Division, Guntur VS Govt. of A. P. - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Secretary / General Manager Chavda Vijaysinh Takhatsinh VS Dilipbhai Bhadabhai Chudasama - Gujarat"]- ["Executive Engineer (Electrical), NESCO, Balasore Elec. Division VS Aswini Kumar Das - Orissa"]- ["Vilas Pandurang Markande VS Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Mumbai - Bombay"]- ["ITW Signode India Ltd. VS P. Lakshminarayanan, S/o. S. Pardhasaradhi Reddy - Telangana"]
In the realm of Indian labour law, the status of an employee as a 'workman' is pivotal for invoking protections under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act). But what happens when employees retire and perhaps take up new employment elsewhere? A common query arises: As per the Industrial Disputes Act, whether retired employees will come under the definition of workmen who again joined in another job?
This question touches on critical aspects of employment termination, retirement, and the scope of 'workman' under Section 2(s). Understanding this can help employers, unions, and former employees navigate disputes effectively. In this post, we explore the legal framework, judicial interpretations, and practical implications—remember, this is general information and not specific legal advice. Always consult a qualified labour law expert for your situation.
The ID Act defines a 'workman' in Section 2(s) as:
Any person (including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied...
Key inclusions:- Dismissed, discharged, or retrenched persons in connection with industrial disputes.
Exclusions:- Managerial or administrative roles.- Supervisory roles with certain powers or salaries above specified thresholds.
The determination hinges on actual duties performed, not just titles or salaries. As noted in one case:
The determination of whether an employee is a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act is based on the actual duties performed, emphasizing that titles or managerial roles do not exclude individuals.... Godrej And Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS Shivkranti Kamgar Sanghatana - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 606
However, this definition raises questions for retired employees. Retirement—whether voluntary, superannuation, or under a scheme—differs from dismissal or retrenchment. Does it sever the 'workman' status permanently?
Generally, retired employees do not fall under the definition of 'workman' for disputes with their former employer. Courts have consistently held that once retired, the employer-employee relationship ends, stripping the individual of 'workman' status under the ID Act.
A direct judicial view states:
Even the definition of the term workman u/s. 2(s) of I.D. Act, does not, in my opinion, take any retired employees. ... The Government, by its order dated 4.3.1998, declined to make the reference holding that a retired workman was not a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act... Retired Employees Association vs The Govt. of AP. - 2008 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 591
Similarly:
The ex-employees no longer being workmen under the I.D. Act, any dispute raised by them would not be an Industrial dispute as defined in the I.D. Act. Philips Electronics India Ltd. VS The Workmen of Philips Electronics India Ltd. - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 400
This position aligns with the Act's intent: protections apply to current or recently terminated (via dismissal/retrenchment) employees, not those who have retired and accepted benefits.
Contrast this with dismissed or retrenched workers:
So far as objection of the petitioner that respondents No. 2 to 19 are the terminated employees, therefore, they cannot raise industrial dispute is also misconceived because as per definition of ‘workmen’ under section 2(s), the workmen includes any such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection with, or as a consequence of that dispute. Pratibha Syntex Ltd. VS State of M. P. - 2019 Supreme(MP) 2
Retirement is typically voluntary or age-based, not a 'dispute-related termination.' Thus, retired employees cannot raise 'industrial disputes' against former employers under Sections 2(k) or 10. Pratibha Syntex Ltd. VS State of M. P. - 2019 Supreme(MP) 2
If a retired employee joins another job, they become a 'workman' for the new employer, provided their role fits Section 2(s). However, this does not revive their workman status vis-à-vis the former employer.
For instance, in cases involving voluntary retirement schemes (VRS):
V.R.S. accepted by an employee - Tenders his resignation in pursuance thereof - Not preclude him to make claim before Forum provided under Labour Laws - Forums for adjudication under I.D. Act prima facie available... Philips Electronics India Ltd. VS The Workmen of Philips Electronics India Ltd. - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 400
Yet, courts scrutinize if the retirement was truly voluntary. If coerced, it might be reclassified, but post-retirement re-employment elsewhere reinforces the severance. Ex-employees' disputes over 'shortfall in payment of commuted amounts' were deemed non-industrial if they no longer hold workman status. Philips Electronics India Ltd. VS The Workmen of Philips Electronics India Ltd. - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 400
Several cases illustrate these principles:
The court ruled that employees in managerial roles and earning above Rs.10,000 do not qualify as 'workmen' under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act... Elecon Engineering Company Ltd (Through Manager) VS Achyutkumar V Patel - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 1910
Even active employees fail if supervisory; retired ones doubly so.
Termination of services due to continued ill-health under Section 2(oo)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act is valid, but equitable considerations necessitate compensation... Rahis Ahemad Khan VS Machino Plastic Limited - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 943
Here, retired-like terminations warrant equity, but not automatic workman reinstatement.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 10(1) and 12(5) - ... The prima facie conclusion of the Industrial Tribunal cannot be said to be perverse... Philips Electronics India Ltd. VS The Workmen of Philips Electronics India Ltd. - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 400
Tribunals assess status preliminarily; retired claims often fail jurisdiction.
In convoy drivers or casual workers cases, delays don't bar disputes, but only for qualifying workmen. Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank VS Ramu Mochi - 2024 Supreme(Jhk) 234
| Scenario | Workman Status for Old Employer | Remedy Path ||----------|--------------------------------|-------------|| Retired & Re-employed | No | Civil Court || Dismissed | Yes | ID Act Tribunal || VRS (Voluntary) | Typically No | Contract Law || Retrenchment | Yes | ID Act (with notice/compensation) |
Retired employees, particularly those who have joined another job, typically do not qualify as 'workmen' under Section 2(s) of the ID Act for disputes with former employers. Judicial precedents emphasize the ended employment relationship post-retirement. Retired Employees Association vs The Govt. of AP. - 2008 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 591Philips Electronics India Ltd. VS The Workmen of Philips Electronics India Ltd. - 2007 Supreme(Bom) 400
Key Takeaways:1. Focus on actual duties and termination nature for status.2. Retirement severs ID Act protections; opt for alternative forums.3. New employment applies only to new employer.4. Always verify with case-specific facts.
Labour laws evolve—stay informed via reliable sources. For personalized guidance, reach out to a labour law specialist.
Disclaimer: This article provides general insights based on precedents and is not legal advice. Laws and interpretations may vary by facts and jurisdiction.
#IndustrialDisputesAct #WorkmanDefinition #LabourLaw
It has come on record that the petitioner is getting pension to the tune of Rs.99/- per day from ESI. ... Accordingly, Hon'ble Supreme Court evolved a scheme to give relief to such workmen and directed the Corporation as follows: (i) The Corporation shall in addition to giving each of the retired workmen his retirement benefits, offer him any other alternative job which may ... There is no dispute that the only sub-clause of the definition of "retr....
Act. By an order dated 8th November 2017, the Industrial Tribunal framed a preliminary issue as to whether the employees mentioned in Annexure-A to the statement of claim are workmen. 7. The respondent examined Mr. ... Since the conciliation proceedings failed, the dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The union raised the dispute on behalf of about 44 employees whose names were stated in Annexure-A to th....
The ideology of the Act being industrial peace, regulation and resolution of industrial disputes between employer and workmen, the range of this statutory ideology must inform the reach of the statutory definition. Nothing less, nothing more. ... 22.The jurisdiction of the Industrial Court to make an award in the dispute would depend upon a finding as to whether the concerned employee is a workman or not. ... , clerical or supervisory work for hire ....
Out of 676 employees 18 employees have raised industrial dispute challenging to such resignation. ... of workmen as per section 2(s) of the I.D.Act. ... 22.The jurisdiction of the Industrial Court to make an award in the dispute would depend upon a finding as to whether the concerned employee is a workman or not. ... There is no dispute as per the proposition that the ....
In the instant case, as already stated, the dispute is as to whether the convoy drivers are employees or workmen of TELCO, that is to say, whether there is relationship of employer and employees between TELCO and the convoy drivers. ... It is urged that in order to form an opinion as to whether an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, one of the factors that has to be considered by the Government is whether ....
In the instant case the question is whether the retired employees can come within the definition of the word 'workman' as defined in the said Act of 1947 and whether the dispute raised by them can be termed as an 'industrial dispute'. ... The question is whether such ex-employees can come within the definition of 'workman' and whether....
Even the definition of the term "workman" u/s. 2(s) of I.D. Act, does not, in my opinion, take any retired employees. ... thereafter by an association of retired employees, would fall within the definition of "industrial dispute" under Section 2(k) necessitating such dispute being referred to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the I.D. ... The Government, by its order dated 4.3.1998, decl....
Even the definition of the term “workman” u/s. 2(s) of I.D. Act, does not, in my opinion, take any retired employees. ... The Government, by its order dated 4.3.1998, declined to make the reference holding that a retired workman was not a “workman” within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, that the demand of retired employees did not fall within the definition of ‘industrial #HL_S....
The said 159 nos. of workmen raised similar claim or regularization and receipt of identical service benefit at per with the employees of the petitioner. That said dispute was also referred to the Industrial Dispute Tribunal vide Case No. ... Act, 1947 defines “Industrial dispute” as follows :- “Industrial dispute” means any dispute or difference between employees#HL_EN....
him, functions mainly of a managerial nature, will come within the definition of workmen. ... The core issue involved in the present writ petition is that whether respondent No.1 comes within the definition of “workman” as defined under Section 2(s) of the Act, and the dispute raised by him invoking the provisions of the Act, is maintainable before the Industrial Tribunal. ... In view of the forgoing reasons as well as the law laid ....
So far as objection of the petitioner that respondents No. 2 to 19 are the terminated employees, therefore, they cannot raise industrial dispute is also misconceived because as per definition of ‘workmen’ under section 2(s), the workmen includes any such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection with, or as a consequence of that dispute. It has been informed that they have also raised a dispute in respect of their termination.
(i) whether the settlement between the parties is legally binding or not ? if not, its effect ? (ii) whether the workmen were falling within the definition of workmen under Section 2(z) of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ?
Under the said Act, unless a group of workmen joined together and raised a dispute, it would not come within the definition of the term "industrial dispute". At the time when the aforesaid decision was rendered, the U.P.Industrial Disputes Act had no provision to enable individual workman to raise an industrial dispute. Hence, the word "workmen", indicating the plural, was held not to include the singular, since such an interpretation on the basis of section 13[2] of the General Clauses Act was beyond the object and scope of U.P.I.D. Act, 1947 at that point of time. But, th....
The ex-employees no longer being "workmen" under the I.D. Act, any dispute raised by them would not be an Industrial dispute as defined in the I.D. Act. In the premises, the petitioners submit that Reference (IT) No.29 of 2005 is not maintainable. 19. Mr. Bharucha contends that, the only issue raised by the ex-employees in Reference (IT) No.29 of 2005 was with respect to the issue of shortfall in payment of commuted amounts.
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
