REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

WORKMEN OF MEENAKSHI MILLS LIMITED Appellant

V/S

STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF MADRAS VS. V G ROW:THE UNION OF INDIA AND THE STATE OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN [REFERRED TO]
DWARKA PRASAD LAXMI NARAIN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [CITED]
TIKA RAMJI OTHERS VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
NIEMLA TEXTILE FINISHING MILLS LIMITED NIEMLA TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED ATLAS CYCLE INDUSTRIES LIMITED SONEPAT HUKAM CHAND VS. IIND PUNJAB TRIBUNAL:STATE OF PUNJAB :STATE OF PUNJAB :STATE OF PUNJAB [RELIED ON]
VIRENDRA K NARENDRA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [FOLLOWED]
D MACROPOLLO AND CO PRIVATE LIMITED VS. D MACROPOLLO AND CO PRIVATE LTD [NOT APPLICABLE]
INDIAN HUME PIPE CO LIMITED VS. WORKMEN [RELIED ON]
ALL INDIA BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION THE STATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION PETITIONERS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR INDIA THE PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ALL INDIA STATE BANK STAFF FEDERATION VS. NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL:NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL BANK DISPUTES :NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL BANK DISPUTES [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SUGAR MILLS LIMITED MEERUT VS. LAKSHMI CHAND [FOLLOWED]
STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:ASST SUPDT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES BIHAR:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
WORKMEN OF SUBONG TEA ESTATE VS. OUTGOING MANAGEMENT OF SUBONG TEA ESTATE ANA ANOTHER [NOT APPLICABLE]
ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED VS. P N SHARMA [DISTINGUISHED]
PARRY AND CO LIMITED VS. P C PAL JUDGE OF THE SECOND INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CALCUTTA [NOT APPLICABLE]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. KAMLA KANT MISRA [DISTINGUISHED]
RAMA SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED THE ANDHRA SUGARS LIMITED VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [RELIED ON]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. N SUNDARA MONEY [RELIED ON]
HINDUSTAN STEEL LIMITED VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT ORISSA [RELIED ON]
DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS COMPANY LIMITED VS. SHAMBHU NATH MUKHERJI [RELIED ON]
MOHINDER SINGH GILL VS. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER NEW DELHI [RELIED ON]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
EXCEL WEAR ACME MANUFACTURING CO LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [DISTINGUISHED]
ORGANO CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES VS. UNION OF INDIA [FOLLOWED]
ALL SAINTS HIGH SCHOOL HYDERABAD VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH GUPTA VS. STATE BANK OF PATIALA [RELIED ON]
SURENDRA KUMAR VERMA VS. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT NEW DELHI [RELIED ON]
MOHAN LAL VS. MANAGEMENT OF BHARAT ELECTRONICS LIMITED [RELIED ON]
NATIONAL TEXTILE WORKERS UNION VS. P R RAMAKRISHNAN [RELIED ON]
MANAGEMENT OF KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION BANGALORE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION BANGALORE VS. M BORAIAH:SHEIKH ABDUL KHADER [RELIED ON]
GAMMON INDIA LIMITED VS. NIRANJAN DASS [RELIED ON]
BABUBHAI AND COMPANY VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [FOLLOWED]
OLGA TELLIS VAYYAPVRI KUPPUSAMI VS. BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION:STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [RELIED ON]
PUNJAB LAND DEVELOPMENT AND RECLAMATION CORPORATION LIMITED CHANDIGARH DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AMRAVATI REGIONAL MANAGER WEST ZONE NOW KNOWN AS KANPUR REGION BANK OF BARODA REGIONAL OFFICE LUCKNOW VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT CHANDIGARH:CHANDRASHEKHAR MARIBHAU DESHMUKH :SECRETARY U P BANK EMPLOYEES UNION C O BANK OF BARODA LATOUCHE ROAD KANPUR :LABOUR COURT RANCHI:NAMDEO:SECRETA [FOLLOWED]
S N MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED ON]
G B MAHAJAN VS. JALGAON MUNICIPAL COUNCIL [RELIED ON]
BYRAM PESTONJI GARIWALA VS. UNION BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals and writ petitions have been placed before us on a reference by a Division Bench of this Court for the reason that they raise the question involving the constitutional validity of S. 26N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The validity of the said provision is assailed on the ground that it is violative of the right guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and is not saved by Cl. (6) of Art. 19.

(2.) Since the only question required to be considered by us is with regard to the validity of S. 25-N of the Act and it can be decided on the basis of the relevant provisions of the Act without going into the facts of each case, we do not consider it necessary to set out the facts.

(3.) Section 25-N forms part of Chapter V-B which bears the heading "Special provisions relating to lay-off, retrenchment and closure in certain establishments". The said Chapter consists of Ss. 25-K to 25-S and was inserted by the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No. 32 of 1976), hereinafter referred to as 'the 1976 Act', with effect from March 5, 1976. Section 25-K, as originally enacted, confined the applicability of the provisions of Chapter V-B to industrial establishments in which not less than 300 workmen were employed on an average per working day for the preceding twelve months. Section 25-M makes provision for prohibition of lay-off. Section 25-N prescribes the conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen. Section 25-O prescribes the procedure for closing down an undertaking. Section 25-P contains special provision as to restarting of undertakings closed down before commnecement of the 1976 Act. Section 25-Q imposes the penalty on the employee for contravention of the provisions of S. 25-M or S. 25-N. Section 25-R prescribes the penalty for closure of an undertaking without complying with the provisions of sub-section (1) of S. 25-O. Section 25-S makes the provisions of Ss. 25-B, 25-D, 25-FF, 25-G, 25-H and 25-J in Chapter V-A applicable to industrial establishments to which the provisions of Chapter V-B apply.

Click here to view full judgment.

WORKMEN OF MEENAKSHI MILLS LIMITED RAJASTHAN TRADE UNION KENDRA RAJASTHAN TRADE UNION KENDRA WORKMEN OF BUCKINGHAM AND CARNATIC MILLS HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONST LIMITED WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL Vs. MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address