Trace Your Case

Categories
Industrial Disputes

SAIL v. National Union Waterfront Workers, (2001) 7 SCC 1.

ISSUE:

Whether the notification dated 9th December 1976 issued by the Central Government is valid and applies to all Central Government Companies?

Whether contract labourers automatically become regular employees upon the issuance of a valid notification under the CLRA Act?

RULE:

The appropriate Government is determined based on the nature of the establishment and whether it is under the control of the Central Government or State Government.

A contract that is found to be a sham or camouflage to hide the real employment relationship may allow the workers to claim employment with the principal employer, triggering an industrial dispute.

A notification may abolish or prohibit contract labour employment in an establishment based on specific factors such as the nature of work, whether it is of perennial nature, and whether regular workmen are employed for similar tasks but it does not automatically convert contract labourers into regular employees.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Trade Unionism

Rohtas Industries v. Union (1976), 2 SCC 82.

ISSUE:

Whether a trade union can be held liable for damages caused by an illegal strike?

Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the portion of the award that directed compensation payment by the workers to the management?

RULE:

A trade union cannot be held liable for damages caused by an illegal strike as it is a collective body, and individual members cannot be made accountable for the actions of a few.

Employers are not entitled to compensation for losses incurred during a strike, and such claims fall outside the scope of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Compensation claims by employers against workers are not industrial disputes under the Industrial Disputes Act, and cannot be settled through arbitration unless the claim is specifically part of an industrial dispute.

The right to strike is fundamental and any employer's right to claim compensation for losses must be balanced against this right.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Workmen

Workmen of Nilgiri Cooperative Marketing Society v. State of Tamil Nadu (2004) 3 SCC 514

ISSUE:

Whether the nature of control, wage payment, and other pertinent elements support classifying Nilgiris Cooperative Marketing Society Limited as the employer of the 407 workers in the Mettupalayam market yard?

Whether the Society's engagement of third parties or contractors for various operations in the market yard constitutes an employment connection, taking into account economic reality, workplace organization, and mutuality of obligations between the parties.

RULE:

The determination of whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor requires a comprehensive analysis of multiple factors, including the level of control exercised by the alleged employer, payment of wages, organization of the workplace, provision of equipment, and overall economic reality.

There is no single conclusive criteria, and the court must consider all of these considerations in order to make a decision.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Industrial Disputes

Workmen Of Dimakuchi Tea Estate V. The Management Of Dimakuchi Tea Estate, Air 1958 Sc 353

ISSUE:

Whether a dispute regarding the employment or non-employment of a person who is not classified as a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, an industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Act?

Whether a dispute qualifies as an industrial dispute under the Act based on direct or substantial interest of the party raising the issue, and what separates a collective dispute from an individual argument in the context of industrial disputes?

RULE:

For a dispute to qualify as an industrial dispute under Section 2(k), the workmen involved must have a direct or substantial interest in the employment or conditions of labor of the individual concerned.

This criterion excludes individuals in positions like managerial or medical staff, whose employment status generally does not affect the workmen’s direct employment interests or conditions of labor.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Industrial Disputes

Workmen v. Dharampal Premchand (Saughandi) AIR 1966 SC 182

ISSUE:

Whether the dismissal of a collective group of workers by the employer constitutes an industrial dispute within the purview of Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act

Whether the union, despite representing only a minority of employees within the establishment, possesses sufficient representative authority to validly raise the dispute on behalf of the dismissed workers

RULE:

A dispute qualifies as an industrial dispute if it involves employment conditions affecting a group of workers and may be raised by any union or group that sufficiently represents them, regardless of majority status within the establishment.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Trade Unionism

Tirumala Tirupati v. Commissioner of Labour, Government of Andhra Pradesh, 1977 SCC OnLine AP 103

ISSUE:

Whether Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam can generally be regarded as an industry?
Whether the persons employed by it are workmen?

Whether they can register themselves into a trade union?

Whether the Devasthanam has locus standi to challenge the order of registration of the Registrar of Trade Unions?

RULE:

The Dominant Nature Test states that if there was a complex of activities in a company, the dominating nature of services and integrated nature of the departments would be the main focus of the test.

The Triple Test is a legal test which was established by the Supreme Court of India in order to determine what exactly an industry is, and what can be classified as one. The requisites to classify the same are;
a) Systematic activity
b) Activity concerned between production and services.
c) Goods and services produced are by the satisfaction of human wants
d) Cooperation between employer and employee

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Trade Unionism

Tata Workers Union v. State of Jharkhand 2005 (4) JCR 278

ISSUE:

Whether the Registrar of Trade Unions has jurisdiction to decide the legality and propriety of any election.

Whether the Registrar of Trade Unions has jurisdiction to direct holding of a fresh election.

RULE:

The Registrar of Trade Unions does not have jurisdiction to decide the legality and propriety of any election or to direct holding of a fresh election.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Workmen

Diwan Mohideen Sahib v. Industrial Tribunal, Madras AIR 1966 SC 370

ISSUE:

Whether the bidi workers should be classified as employees of the appellants or independent contractors?

Whether the appellant’s level of control and supervision over the workers is sufficient to form an employer-employee relationship?

RULE:

The existence of an employment relationship is established based on the level of control and supervision exerted by the employer over the workers, including authority over work performance and conditions.

An employment relationship is essentially a factual issue, with the kind and level of power varying among industries.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Workmen

Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd v. State of Saurashtra AIR 1957 SC 264

ISSUE:

Whether, given the nature of their work and the appellants' control, the agarias(salt workers) are independent contractors or workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947?

What are the essential elements for defining a master-servant or employer-employee relationship, and how do these criteria apply to the agarias?

RULE:

Whether an individual is a "workman" under the Industrial Disputes Act depends on the employer's control over how the work is performed, beyond merely specifying what work is to be done.

This level of control, which varies by industry, is central to establishing an employer-employee relationship.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here
Categories
Workmen

Workmen of the Canteen of Coates of India Ltd v. Coates of India Ltd. (2004) 3 SCC 547

ISSUE:

Whether the workmen employed in a canteen, which was run on the premises of Coates of India Ltd., could be regarded as the workmen of Coates of India Ltd.?

RULE:

If the employees are neither directly appointed by the company nor the company had any supervisory control over them, then they cannot be regarded as workmen of the company.

Subscribe to Read More.
Join Now
Already a member? Log in here