Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957

18 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusS. SATYAM AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 81231 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a civil appeal by the Central Bank of India against a High Court order that granted re‑employment relief to a group of workmen who had been retrenched between 1974 and 1976. The workmen filed a writ petition in 1982 invoking Section 25‑H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking prefere

MIS. FABRIL GASOSAversusLABOUR COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

1997 INSC 8031 January 1997Dismissed

M/s. FabriL Gasosa entered into a written settlement with the employees' union in 1986 providing for Variable Dearness Allowance (VDA). The union later gave notice of termination and issued a fresh charter of demands, but did not alter the VDA rate. The employer unilaterally froze VDA and claimed an oral agreement to t

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusM.T.S.S.D. WORKERS UNION & ORS.

1988 INSC 2727 January 1988Dismissed

The Union of India appealed a Bombay High Court judgment that had quashed an order dividing electoral constituencies for the election of a Works Committee under the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957. The order sought to create multiple constituencies to represent various sections of workers, even though the M.T

BROOKE BOND INDIA LTD.versusTHE WORKMEN

1981 INSC 12022 July 1981Dismissed

Brooke Bond India Ltd. and its workmen’s unions were involved in a government‑referenced industrial dispute. The Rashtriya Union’s negotiation committee signed a memorandum of settlement on 16 March 1978, which was later filed for an award. The union’s executive committee subsequently resolved to reject the agreement,

M/S. HARYANA SURAJ MALTING LTD.versusPHOOL CHAND

2018 INSC 53718 May 2018Disposed off

The case concerned whether an Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court loses its jurisdiction to set aside an ex‑parte award once the award becomes enforceable under Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The appellant, Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd., sought to have an ex‑parte award against workman Phool Chand recal

WORKMEN OF MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD. ETC. ETC.versusMEENAKSHI MILLS LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 16415 May 1992

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Section 25‑N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which requires prior governmental permission before an employer can retrench workmen in large establishments. The Court held that the right to retrench is an integral part of the employer’s Article 19(1)(g) right to c

SYNDICATE BANK AND ANR. ETC. ETCversusSH. K. UMESH NAYAK ETC. ETC.

1994 INSC 38513 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether bank employees on strike were entitled to wages for the strike period. It held that entitlement to wages requires the strike to be both legal and justified, and that questions of legality and justifiability are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the industrial adjudicator under the

RAJ KUMARversusDIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 31813 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent driver at DAV Public School, was declared surplus and retrenched by the school’s Managing Committee in 2003. The school served a notice under Section 25F(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act but failed to send the statutory notice to the appropriate government authority under Section 25F(c) and

GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

1980 INSC 23312 December 1980Dismissed

The Central Government referred an industrial dispute between Grindlays Bank Ltd. and its workmen to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal under s.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. After several adjournments, the Tribunal refused a further adjournment on 9 December 1976 and passed an ex‑parte award, relying

STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPURversusOM PRAKASH SHARMA

2006 INSC 34012 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Om Prakash Sharma, a casual worker of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, was terminated after three and a half months and replaced by a junior employee. He raised an industrial dispute and the appropriate Government referred the question of whether his termination violated Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 194

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.versusBRAJRAJNAGAR COAL MINES WORKERS’ UNION

2024 INSC 19912 March 2024

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant) had engaged a contractor to transport crushed coal, employing 32 workmen from 1984 to 1994. The workers' union sought regularisation of all 32 workers under clauses of the National Coal Wage Agreement IV, leading to a settlement on 5 April 1997 that regularised only 19 of them,

UCO BANK AND ORS.versusSANWAR MAL

2004 INSC 16411 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sanwar Mal, a former Class‑IV employee of UCO Bank who resigned in 1988, sought to join the bank's Employees' Pension Scheme introduced in 1995 under a 1993 settlement. The bank refused, invoking Regulation 22 which disqualifies any employee who has resigned, been dismissed or removed from pension benefits. The employe

C.V. SATHEESHCHANDRANversusGENERAL MANAGER, UCO BANK AND ORS .

2008 INSC 4111 January 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a clerk promoted to Assistant Manager in UCO Bank, sought reversion to his clerical post after more than a year on probation. The bank granted reversion on conditions that he permanently lose any chance of promotion and be denied stagnation increments. The appellant challenged these conditions, arguing t

M/S. INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusDEVKI DEVI AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3995 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a public sector undertaking, gave contract work to the widows and dependents of employees who died in harness after a union demand, without any compassionate appointment scheme. The contracts were later terminated in 1998 due to the company's severe financial distress, prompting

HARJINDER SINGHversusPUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION

2010 INSC 95 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Harjinder Singh, a workman employed by Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, was retrenched despite seniority over junior employees. The Labour Court awarded him reinstatement with 50% back wages under Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under

M.R. PRABHAKAR AND OTHERSversusCANARA BANK AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 4433 October 2012Dismissed

The appellants were officers of Canara Bank who resigned between 1986 and June 1993, i.e., before the statutory settlement dated 29‑Oct‑1993 and the Canara Bank Employees' Pension Regulations, 1995 came into force. They claimed entitlement to a pension in lieu of the Contributory Providable Fund, relying on the pension

UCO BANK & ANR.versusVIJAY KUMAR HANDA

2025 INSC 4422 April 2025Dismissed

Vijay Kumar Handa, a clerk of UCO Bank, was charged with gross misconduct and dismissed from service in 1999. The appellate authority modified the penalty to removal from service with entitlement to terminal benefits, stating that removal would not disqualify future employment. The bank later challenged the award of th

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search