Indian Bank Vs Management of Indian Bank 1985 1 LLJ 6 (Mad.)
It was observed that where privilege is given to an office-bearer of a trade union in the form of duty, relief was withdrawn by the management which was granted to the privileged. It cannot be said that an industrial dispute has arisen thereby and the legal status of the duty relief is only that of a concession and not a matter relating to conditions of service. In this case, it was held that where the concession provided is withdrawn, the beneficiary cannot complain that a condition of service is affected and the management is not entitled to do so without raising an industrial dispute and having the matter adjudicated by the authority.
Guest Keen William (Private) Ltd. Vs Sterling (P.J) and others
It was held by the Supreme Court that the delay in raising an industrial dispute does not serve as a bar to the reference of a dispute. If the dispute is raised after a considerable delay that is not reasonably explained, the Tribunal would take that into account while dealing with the merit of the dispute.
Bombay Union of Journalists vs. The Hindu 1961, II LLJ 727 Bom
A person working in ‘The Hindu, Madras’ was dismissed for claiming as a full-time employee. The Bombay Union of Journalists raised the dispute. It was found that there were ten employees out of which seven on the administrative side and only three on the journalism side. Of these three, only two were members of the union. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the Bombay Union of Journalists is not competent to raise this dispute. Even if it had been raised, it could not have become an industrial dispute.
Workmen of Indian Express Newspapers Ltd. vs. Management Indian Express Newspapers AIR 1970, SC 737
A dispute between two workmen of Indian Express Newspapers Ltd was espoused by the Delhi Union of Journalists which was an outside union. About 25 per cent of the working journalists of the Indian Express were members of that union. But there was no union of the journalists of the Indian Express. It was held that the Delhi Union of Journalists could be said to have a representative character as the working journalists employed at Indian Express and the dispute was thus transformed into an industrial dispute. Thus, an individual dispute to fall within the definition of industrial dispute, it must be sponsored by the Trade Union of the workmen or if there is no trade union, it must be sponsored by the majority of the workmen or it must comply with the requirements of Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
In the landmark case of Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. The Management of Dimakuchi Tea Estate Supreme Court identified two tests to determine whether a dispute was industrial or individual,
Supreme Court held that an individual dispute could be transformed into an industrial dispute if it was sponsored by a trade union or if it was sponsored by a significant number of workers. To make an individual dispute into an industrial dispute, it must be taken up by a union of employees of the establishment and, where no such union exists, it can be married by any union of workers employed in similar trade. Concerning the second condition, if an individual dispute between a worker is dealt with by a considerable number of workers of the same establishment, it becomes an industrial dispute. The Court admitted that the term “number appreciable” does not mean a majority of the workers.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.