University XYZ is a newly form State University in Jaipur, Rajasthan in 2007. University is providing variety of professional courses like MBA, MBBS, LLB, B.Tech., MCA, B.Ed. etc. The university is situated at the outski

CS Professional · Labour Laws & Practice · PYQS · June 2019
University XYZ is a newly form State University in Jaipur, Rajasthan in 2007. University is providing variety of professional courses like MBA, MBBS, LLB, B.Tech., MCA, B.Ed. etc. The university is situated at the outskirts of city Jaipur, around 20 km from main bus-stand north-east direction. University provides residential facilities to students as well as academic and non-academic staff. For day scholar, it provides the community transport facility from University to Central Park, Jaipur. The University has been ranked as the 7th upcoming University in higher education. Government of Rajasthan has invested around ₹500 crore for its development. University has around 200 teaching staff in various departments and 250 non-teaching staff including bus driver, library staff, administrative staff. Teachers have formed association named 'XUTA' (XYZ University Teachers Association) and non-academic staff has formed 'XUTU' (XYZ University Trade Union). Apart from specific complain, both groups have some general grounds of complain of the following nature : University has not implemented 7th pay commission salary structure. Working conditions are harsh and not as per UGC guidelines. University not providing pension scheme of any nature. Infrastructure conditions of building and buses are pathetic. As per the guidelines of XYZ University, seats in the University for Rajasthan domicile is 85% reserved and 15% of seat are reserved for students from outside state. Around 300 students stay in the hostel of University and 450 students are day scholars. Students have their Union named as 'SXUA' (Student of XYZ University Association). Students have certain regular complains to the University about poor infrastructure, poor conditions of buses/transport facility, lack of basic amenities, lock of good canteen and playing grounds. University has not responded to any complain of teaching staff, non-teaching staff and student's union positively. It has not deliberated on the issue at any forum showing their non-sensitiveness to the complaints. On 15 January 2015, while commuting from Jaipur to University in early hours, the University bus met with an accident. Driver of the bus along with 2 students suffered injury. Ramlal, the driver due to accident lost his left eye and broken left hand. Students with minor injuries are safe. Instead of making proper inquiry to the issue, the university administration issued a show cause notice of termination to Ramlal, saying that he was driving bus in inebirated conditions and therefore, he alone is responsible for the accident. Ramlal is not the member of the "XYZ University Staff Union" on the day of accident and notice. His reply to the notice of termination was not taken into consideration on this ground. Realizing the injustice to Ramlal, the XUSU, XUTA and SXUA joined together and gheraoed the administrative head of University for 2 hours on 30 January, 2015. After the intervention of enforcement agency the matter was sorted out on that day. However, these three groups continued with strike in the University. On the basis of above facts, please advise on the following issues : Whether an individual dispute can be named as industrial dispute?

Answer & Explanation:

Till the provisions of Section 2A were inserted in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, it has been held by the Supreme Court that an individual dispute per se is not industrial dispute. But it can develop into an industrial dispute when it is taken up by the union or substantial number of workmen ( Central Province Transport Service v. Raghunath Gopal Patwardhan ). In the case of Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate , the Supreme Court held that it is not that dispute relating to "any person" can become an industrial dispute. There should be community of interest. A dispute may initially be an individual dispute, but the workmen may make that dispute as their own, they may espouse it on the ground that they have a community of interest and are directly and substantially interested in the employment, non-employment, or conditions of work of the concerned workmen. All workmen need not to join the dispute. Any dispute which affects workmen as a class is an industrial dispute, even though, it might have been raised by a minority group. It may be that at the date of dismissal of the workman there was no union. But that does not mean that the dispute cannot become an industrial dispute because there was no such union in existence on that date. If it is insisted that the concerned workman must be a member of the union on the date of his dismissal, or there was no union in that particular industry, then the dismissal of such a workman can never be an industrial dispute although the other workmen have a commonality of interest in the matter of his dismissal and the cause for which on the manner in which his dismissal was brought about directly and substantially affects the other workmen. The only condition for an individual dispute turning into an industrial dispute, as laid down in the case of Dimakuchi Tea Estate is the necessity of a commonality of interest and not whether the concerned workman was or was not a member of the union at the time of his dismissal. At the time of making reference for adjudication, individual dispute must have been espoused, otherwise it will not become an industrial dispute and reference of such dispute will be invalid. Section 2A does not declare all individual disputes to be industrial disputes. It is only when a dispute is connected with a discharged, dismissed retrenched or terminated workman that it shall be treated as an industrial dispute. If the dispute or difference is connected with some other matter e.g. payment of bonus/ gratuity etc. then it would have to satisfy the test laid down in judicial decisions. A perusal of Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 would show that once the employee is aggrieved by his dismissal and the employer disputes his dismissal, the dismissal would be "Industrial dispute". In this case, termination of Ramlal, an employee, though an individual dispute becomes Industrial Dispute by virtue of satisfying requirement of section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Topics: Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic