Case: Management of English Electric Company of India Vs. V. Manohara Rao and Others

The respondents filed a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming difference in the wages paid to the permanent workmen and to the respondents. During pendency of the said claim petition the services of the respondents were terminated on October 16, 1991. A complaint is made under Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act (Act for short) on the ground that during pendency of the proceedings filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Act the appellant has effected termination of services which amounts to unfair labour practice. On that basis the Labour Court held that the services of the respondents could not have been terminated and they were directed to be reinstated till the disposal of the claim petitions with back wages and other benefits. Against this order these appeals are preferred. A plain reading of Sections 33 and 33-A of the Act will make it clear that it is only during the pendency of any proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute the provisions of Section 33-A would be attracted and not otherwise. There was no industrial dispute but a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Act was pending. This aspect was totally lost sight of by the Labour Court in dealing with this matter and,

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]A plain reading of Sections 33 andA of the Act will make it clear that it is only during the pendency of any proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute the provisions of SectionA would be attracted and not otherwise. There was no industrial dispute but a claim petition under Section) of the Act was pending. This aspect was totally lost sight of by the Labour Court in dealing with this matter and,