Skip to main content

Labour Codes : Industrial Relations Code = Delhi High Court question Centre on implementation of IR Code without transition plan

 N A SebastiaDelhi High Court Questions Centre on Failure to Constitute Industrial Tribunals UnderNew Industrial Relations Code, Flags Absence of Smooth Transition Plan N A Sebastian and Anr vs Union of India , W.P.(C) 18325/2025 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Ravindra S. Garia, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Mr. Adrija Bhadra, Mr.Sarfuddin Khan, Mr. Tej Bahadur Srivastava, Advocates. For the Respondent(s): Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Ashish Dixit, CGSC, Ms.Gurleen Kaur Waraich, SPC, Mr. Surjeet Singh, GP, Mr. Jaideep Singh Waraich and Mr.Vivek Sharma, Advocates for UOI.The Delhi High Court has issued notice to the Union Government on a petition challengingthe implementation of the Industrial Relations (IR) Code, 2020, highlighting that pendinglabour disputes from erstwhile Labour Courts and Tribunals under the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 stand transferred to new Industrial Tribunals that have not yet been constituted.A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar RaoGedela observed that the Centre’s notification dated 21 November 2025 appointing that datefor commencement of the IR Code has created a legal vacuum. Under Section 51 of the Code,all pending cases before pre-existing Labour Courts and Tribunals are automaticallytransferred to the new regime’s Industrial Tribunals on commencement, but Section 44mandates constitution of such Tribunals comprising Judicial and Administrative Members.Interestingly, no such bodies exist owing to the absence of qualifying rules under Section 184of the Finance Act, 2017.The Court prima facie observed that the necessary provisions for the transition periodallowing a smooth transfer of the Labour Code seemed to have been overlooked by theCentral Government, resulting in labour disputes remaining unattended. It remarked there is“no likelihood” of Tribunals being constituted soon, leaving transferred cases in limbo andpreventing adjudication of even new disputes.The Bench suggested a simple solution, noting that the transition could have been easilymanaged by issuing notifications to enforce different provisions from different dates. Itdirected Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma to seek urgent instructions and considerremedial steps.The petition seeks stay on the 21 November notification to avert this “inadvertent” disruption.The matter is listed for hearing on 10 December 2025n & Anr v. Union of India].

Courtesy: Scribd

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MCS MAHARASHTRA COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY BYE LAWS 101 TO END

MCS BYE LAWS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST 101 TO END 101. If all the business on the agenda of the General Body Meeting of the Society cannot be transacted on the day on which the General Body Meeting is convened, the meeting shall be postponed to any other suitable date as may be decided by the Members present at the meeting, however not later than 30 days from the date of the meeting. 102. The Chairman of the Society shall preside over all General Body Meetings of the Society, in case if the Chairman is absent or if present and is unwilling to preside, the Members present may elect a person from amongst themselves to preside over the meeting. 103. No proxy or a holder of power of attorney or letter of authority shall be eligible to attend a General Body Meeting of the Society on behalf of a Member of the Society. 104. Voting right of a Member and the Associate Member of the Society shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of Section 27 of ...
4 comments
Read more

PoSH Act: ICC of the Employer of the Complainant (Victim) is also empowered to conduct enquiry -Path-breaking Ruling by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

 KEY POINTS BY LAWSHASTRA - FULL JUDGEMENT APPENDED BELOW   This path-breaking judgement by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has well enunciated the objectives of the VISHAKA Guidelines and the PoSH Act, while spelling out the jurisdictional aspects of the “Employer” Crystal clear.  Precisely, the jurisdictional challenge by the Appellant in the present case, inter alia relates to whether the Internal Complaints Committee (hereinafter referred to as “ICC”) constituted at a certain Department of the Government of India can entertain a complaint under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “POSH Act”) against the Appellant who was working at a different Department of the Government of India at the relevant time.  Key Points for reference   PoSH Act. (extracts) Section 2(a)  “(a) “aggrieved woman” means -  in relation to a workplace, a woman, of any age whether employed or n...
Post a Comment
Read more

Regulatory Labour Law Compliances and PoSH

  Management Development Program (MDP) on Regulatory Labour Law Compliance • Chetana’s Institute of Management and Research (CIMR) organized a Management Development Program (MDP) on Regulatory Labour Law Compliance for Industrial Relations/Employee Relations Officers and HR Managers. The two-day program was held on December 10th and 11th, 2024. The MDP aimed to enhance participants' knowledge and practical application of labour law compliance and related tools. The program attracted nominations from five prominent manufacturing companies in Mumbai and Thane. Thus, the participants were senior officers responsible for compliance matters and 15 HR students from CIMR. Program Highlights • Dr. Madhumita Patil, CEO of CIMR and CRKIMR, inaugurated the program, emphasizing the importance of compliance to protect the workforce. • Mr. Vijay Padate, a distinguished expert and former Director of the Employer Federation of India, as well as a former member of EPFO and ESIC, provided a compre...
12 comments
Read more