#labour court jurisdiction

Even though the employer failed to obtain prior approval under Sec 33(2)(b) before dismissing the employee, the High Court ruled that the workman remains entitled to back wages and that the Labour Court retains jurisdiction to assess misconduct. This protects dismissed workers from losing monetary relief due to procedural lapses by the employer.

Karnataka High Court rules that Labour Courts continue to exercise jurisdiction under Section 51 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, even after the repeal of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, until new Industrial Tribunals are constituted. This ensures jurisdictional continuity for pending and future industrial disputes.

Bombay HC rules that termination of contractual employees during the subsistence of a binding interim order under the Industrial Disputes Act is illegal. The court mandates reinstatement with limited compensation, reinforcing that interim orders override contractual termination clauses.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that a workman need not wait for a formal reference from the Deputy Commissioner of Labour to approach the Labour Court under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Once 45 days have passed since filing a conciliation application, the Labour Court must adjudicate the dispute on its merits - not dismiss it on procedural technicalities. This empowers individual workers to seek justice without bureaucratic delay.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court reaffirmed that workmen can directly invoke the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, even when an alternative remedy exists under cooperative societies law. This ruling reinforces the non-exclusivity of statutory labour remedies, ensuring workmen are not compelled to exhaust parallel forums before seeking justice.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that monetary benefits under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act can only be enforced if they arise from a pre-existing right, such as service rules or admitted claims. The Court upheld the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 29,920 with 12% interest, reinforcing that disputed claims cannot be adjudicated under this provision.

Bombay High Court holds that Labour Courts cannot implead new employers beyond the terms of reference under Section 10(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Kerala High Court holds that Labour Courts cannot adjudicate sham closure claims unless the reference explicitly frames it; reinstatement orders quashed for jurisdictional defect.