ANJUMAN-I-ISLAM’S

BARRISTER A.R. ANTHULAY COLLEGE OF

LAW

NAME : KHAN ADIBA SALIM

CLASS : FY LLB, DIVISION ‘A’

ROLL NO : 36

SUBJECT : LABOUR LAW

TOPIC : STANDING ORDERS

SUBMISSION : 22ND DECEMBER, 2023

PROFESSOR : PROF. SMITA THOOL

PROF. MEHBOOBI PATEL

PROFESSOR SIGNATURE

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, Adiba Khan students of ANJUMAN-I-ISLAM BARRISTER A. R ANTULAY COLLEGE

OF LAW, Semester I, do hereby acknowledge our gratefulness towards all the persons
associated in the completion of this assignment.

First of all, I would like to pay our thanks to our Prof. Smita thool and Prof. Mehboobi patel.
who has chosen us this topic and also provided us help with knowledge, inspiration
and information. It would not be possible for us to complete the same without sincere
and affectionate help.

Secondly, I would like to thank our librarian who has provided us appropriate sources with
library facility to gather the information which needed for my assignment.

……………………

(Signature of the students)

Date: 22/12/2023

Place: Mumbai

2|Page
 INDEX
SR. NO. TOPIC PAGE NO
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE ACT 5
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT 6
1.3 FEATURES OF THE ACT 6
1.4 STATUTORY NATURE OF STANDING ORDERS 7
1.5 WHAT IS STANDING ORDERS 9
CHAPTER 2 MAIN PROVISIONS 11
2.1 SUBMISSION &CONDITIONS FOR STANDING ORDERS 11
2.2 CERTIFICATION & APPEALS OF STANDING ORDERS 13
2.3 OPERATION, REGISTER &POSTING OF STANDING ORDERS 14
2.4 MODIFICATION, CERTIFYING OFFICER &ORAL EVIDENCE 15
CHAPTER 3 INTERPRETATION OF STANDING ORDER & INDUSTRIES 17
TO WHICH THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY
3.1 INTERPRETATION OF STANDING ORDER 17
3.2 INDUSTRIES TO WHICH THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY 17
CHAPTER 4 POWER TO EXEMPT, DELEGATION& MAKE RULES 19
4.1 POWER TO EXEMPT 19
4.2 DELEGATION OF POWER 19
4.3 POWER TO MAKE RULE 19
CHAPTER 5 ROLE OF JUDICIARY 21
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION 24
REFERCES

3|Page
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act, 1946 (hereby referred to as

‘IESO’) precisely defines the conditions of employment under an employer to both the
employer and the workmen. Before the IESO Act was passed, there was a lack of order and
clarity regarding the terms of employment by an employer. The workmen at that time were
hired on a contractual basis individually, and in most cases these contracts were either
express or implied, thus often leading to a misunderstanding of expectations between the
employer and the workmen.

In many cases, these terms and conditions of hiring were ambiguous and led to
friction between the workmen and the management. The lack of rules for securing
permanency of the job, fair deal and disciplinary action on petty matters was a worrying
problem for industrial workmen. There was no provision against abrupt dismissal or wrongful
termination. The workmen had no safeguards against any disciplinary actions that the
employers took for they didn’t have any guidelines or rules protecting their interest. Even in
large industries, if there was a standing order, there was no particular guidelines that it had to
follow or any legislation governing the enforcement of the same.

With the concept of Trade Unionism coming into play, the State and the Tripartite
Labour Conference became the voice of the workmen and helped pass the Industrial
Employment (Standing Order) Act in 1946 to ensure clear and well-defined employment
conditions or standing orders that helped establish smoother working relations between
industrial workmen and employers.

The objective of the IESO Act is to regulate the conditions of recruitment, discharge,
disciplinary action, holidays, classification of workers, mechanism of wage rates, attendance
issues, etc. Anything that requires ‘employers in industrial establishments formally to define
conditions of employment under them’ falls within the scope of the IESO Act.

The Act makes it binding for employers to ‘define with sufficient precision the
conditions of employment and to make those conditions known to the workmen.

4|Page
 The IESO Act helped introduce a uniformity or terms and conditions of employment
in respect of workmen belonging to the same category and discharging the same or similar
work in an industrial establishment. Overall, the IESO Act helped bring regulation and a
sense of order amongst the workmen and the employers.

This Act requires the employers to define the conditions of service in their
establishments and to put them in writing and then get them certified by the Certifying
Officer to avoid any unnecessary industrial disputes in the future between the employers and
the workmen. The standing orders of the said industrial establishment must conform to the
model standing orders but not necessarily consist only of the model standing order. If the
establishment wishes to add to the standing orders, then they can do so, provided the draft of
the same gets approved by the Certifying Officer.

In the case of Avery India Ltd. v. Second Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal it was
held that the provisions as to the age of retirement in the standing orders of an establishment
would apply to all the employees irrespective of whether or not they were part of the
establishment where they work prior to or subsequent to the standing orders coming into
force, even though there was no such provision for the age of retirement in the past.

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE ACT: -

Earlier, the working conditions and conditions of employment were governed by the
contracts between employer and employee. The terms and conditions were not specified in
detail, which led to confusion and chaos. It often led to friction between them in an industry.
In the 18th century, with the advent of trade unions and workers’ unions in the country, the
problems of workers and their pathetic conditions were taken into consideration. The focus of
the government was shifted to industrial peace and better working conditions for the
employees. The settlement of labour problems became a major concern for the state. This is
because it affected the productivity of industries and their role in the economy of the nation.

This need to precisely define employment conditions became a burning topic of

discussion in the Tripartite Labour Conferences, as a result of which the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, was enacted. The Act makes it compulsory for
the industries governed by it to define the working conditions of employees, that they must be

5|Page
 known to them, and that they must give consent to all the conditions. The aim is to regulate
the conditions of employment, the appointment of employees, their discharge, disciplinary
actions to be taken against them, if any, holidays, etc. It helped in creating uniformity in the
conditions and a better working environment for the employees belonging to the same
category of employment.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT: -

The following are the objectives of the Act:

 One of the most important objectives of the Act is to provide provisions for standing
orders setting out rules and regulations of the working conditions in the factories and
industries covered under the Act.
 To make it compulsory for the employers to abide by the terms and conditions to
provide better working conditions for the employees and their welfare.
 To promote harmonious relationship between employer-employee.
 The Act also aims at promoting peace and harmony in an industry.

1.3 FEATURES OF THE ACT: -

The Act provides:

 Every employer whose industry is covered under the Act is required to make Standing
Orders and submit them to the certifying authority.
 The certifying authority is generally the labour commissioner.
 The certifying officer is given the power to modify or add contents to the Standing
Orders in order to certify it.
 Any group of employers in the same category of industries is allowed to submit a
joint standing order.
 In order to make it easy for the employers, the government can set out a model
standing order with which all the standing orders prepared by the employers must
comply.
 The Act applies to industries with 100 or more employees.
 The certifying officers and authority have all the powers of a civil court for matters
under the Act.

6|Page
  An employer can be held liable for not submitting the standing order or contravening
its provisions when finalised. Moreover, he can be penalised for the same.
 The appropriate government has the power to exempt any industry from the ambit of
the Act by notification in the official gazette.
 The following are the certificate officers under the Act:
 Labour Commissioner
 Regional Labour Commissioner
 Any other person appointed by the appropriate government to carry out
the functions of a certificate officer under the Act

1.4 STATUTORY NATURE OF STANDING ORDERS: -

The very first argument of Standing Orders as being statutory in nature comes from
the case The Bagalkot Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. R.K. Pathan & Ors. wherein the Supreme
Court stated that:
“The object of the Act as we have already seen, was to require the employers to make the
conditions of employment precise and definite and the act ultimately intended to
prescribe these conditions in the form of standing orders so that what used to be
governed by a contract hereto before would now be governed by the statutory standing
orders…”.
This decision of the Supreme Court was relied upon in various other judgements to
conclude that Standing Orders, once certified, are statutory in nature. This was reinforced by
the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Tata Chemicals Ltd. And Ors. vs Kailash C.
Adhvaryu wherein the judge distinguished between a statutory obligation and a contractual
obligation and therefore came to the conclusion that certification of standing orders under the
IESO Act creates statutory rights and obligations.
Another argument pertaining to the statutory nature of standing orders is that the
Certifying Officer, in certifying the draft of the standing orders made by the employer, is part
of a delegated legislation. The process of hearing from both parties before certifying the
standing orders may as well be seen as a consultation of sorts to those affected by the
decision. This, in turn, makes the Certifying Officer, part of a rule-making process, thus
making the entire process statutory in nature.

Arguments against the statutory nature of standing orders can be put forward as follows:

7|Page
 If we are to assume that the standing orders are statutory in nature, then they are in
contradiction to the fundamental rights given to citizens in our constitution; the
constitutional validity of these statutory rights and obligations against our
fundamental rights can be argued by parties under Article 32 and Article 226 of the
constitution. Another aspect to consider is the infringement of Article 14 and the
Right to Equality caused by assuming certified standing orders as statutory in nature
and applying it to workmen of like industries and under similar circumstances.

 The second argument against the statutory nature of standing orders is that Tribunals
are not supposed to have the power to override provisions having statutory effect.
Industrial Tribunals, under The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, have the power to
create new rights and obligations and to vary terms of an agreement or contract
pertaining to the proprietary or legality of an order passed by an employee under
standing orders and the application and interpretation of standing orders. If we
consider certified standing rights as statutory in nature, it negates the power for the
tribunals to override and create changes and modifications in the standing orders, thus
hampering its power to provide industrial justice.

 Section 10(1) of the IESO Act clearly states that even after the certification of the
standing orders, they are liable to change on agreement between the employers and
the workmen. This is in complete contradiction to the statutory nature of standing
orders as no statute can be modified on agreement between two parties. Provisions
with true statutory effects are not susceptible to amendments based on agreements
between two parties.

 Lastly, the Act imposes restrictions on the bargaining power of the employers
curtailing the freedom of contract so that employers must present draft standing orders
which are compatible with the statute. In no way does the Act delegate any legislative
powers to any authority but rather, it imposes an obligation on an individual employer
to make rules keeping in mind the model standing orders given in the schedule.
Furthermore, the Certifying officer has only limited judicial power. Thus, we

8|Page
 understand that certified standing orders are not delegated legislation and hence, are
not statutory in nature.

1.5 WHAT IS STANDING ORDERS: -

According to Section 2 (g) of Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946,
standing orders means rules relating to matters set out in the Schedule.
The Schedule attached to the Act includes the following matters-
(1) Classification of workmen, e.g., whether permanent, temporary, apprentice,
probationers, or badlis.
(2) Manner of intimating to workmen periods and hours of work, holidays, pay days
and wage rates.
(3) Shift working.
(4) Attendance and late coming.
(5) Conditions of procedure in applying for and the authority which may grant leave
and holidays.
(6) Requirement to enter premises by certain gates, and liability to search.
(7) Closing and reopening of sections of the industrial establishment, and temporary
stoppages of work and the rights and liabilities of the employer and workmen
arising therefrom.

(8) Termination of employment and the notice thereof to be given by employer and
workmen.

(9) Suspension or dismissal for misconduct, and acts or omissions which constitute
misconduct.

(10) Means of redress for workmen against unfair treatment or wrongful exactions by
the employer or his agents or servant.

(11) Any other matter which may be prescribed.

A permanent workman means a workman who has been employed on permanent

basis. Temporary workman means a workman who has been engaged for a work which is of
temporary nature. Apprentice means a learner who is paid an allowance during the period of

9|Page
his training. Probationer means a workman who is provisionally employed to fill a permanent
vacancy. Badli workman means a workman who works in place of another regular workman.

In Express Newspapers Ltd. v. Labour Court, Madras, the Supreme Court has held
that an employee appointed on probation for six months continuous employment the
employer has no right to terminate employment before the full period without any expressed
provision to the contrary in the appointment letter if there are no standing orders.

The issue in Freewheels India Ltd. v. State of Haryana (1984) pertains to the
standing order, which provides that if an employee was absent for 8 consecutive days, he
would be automatically terminated. An employee produced a medical certificate and
requested to rejoin his duty after being on leave for eight consecutive days. The Punjab-
Haryana High Court held that according to the standing order, his employment is terminated,
but he has the option of converting his period of absence into leave without pay by giving an
explanation for his absence. No such explanation was given by him, and the Court observed
that a medical or fitness certificate cannot be considered an explanation in this regard.

10 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 2

MAIN PROVISIONS

2.1 SUBMISSION AND CONDITIONS FOR CERTIFICATION STANDING ORDERS

- SECTION 3, 4

 SUBMISSION OF DRAFT
Section 3 of the Act makes it mandatory for an employer to submit draft standing
orders to the Certifying Officer as per the procedure laid down under this section. Section 3
provides as under-

(1) Within six months from the date on which this Act becomes applicable to an
industrial establishment, the employer shall submit to the Certifying Officer five
copies of the draft standing orders proposed by him for adoption in his industrial
establishment.

(2) Provision shall be made in such draft for every matter set out in the Schedule which
may be applicable to the industrial establishment, and where model standing orders
have been prescribed, shall be, so far as is practicable, in conformity with such
model.

(3) The draft standing orders submitted under this section shall be accompanied by a
statement giving prescribed particulars of the workmen employed in the industrial
establishment including the name of the trade union, if any, to which they belong.

(4) Subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, a group of employers in similar

industrial establishments may submit a joint draft of standing orders under this
section.

In Associated Cement Co. v. P.D. Vyas, the Supreme Court has said that draft
standing orders must be in conformity with the model standing orders which is provided
under Section 15(2)(b) of the Act and unless it is shown that it would be impracticable to do
so, draft standing orders must be in conformity with the model standing orders. Though this
requirement does not mean that the draft standing orders must be in identical words, it does
mean that in substance it must conform to the model prescribed by that appropriate
Government. Model Standing Orders would prevail over Service Regulations.

11 | P a g e
S.K. Sheshadri v H.A.L and others, (1983)

In this case, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held that, as long as the Standing
Orders fall within the Schedule to the Act, irrespective of the fact that they contain additional
provisions which are not accounted for in the MSOs, the Standing Orders would not be
deemed to be invalid or ultra vires of the Act. The MSOs only serve as a model for framing
the Standing Orders.

 CONDITIONS FOR CERTIFICATION OF STANDING ORDERS

Section 4 of the Act lays down the conditions which must be fulfilled before the
certification of the standing orders. These are conditions precedent for the certification of the
standing orders. According to Section 4, the Certifying Officer shall certify the standing
orders if the following conditions are fulfilled-

a. provision is made therein for every matter set out in the Schedule which is
applicable to the industrial establishment, and
b. the standing orders are otherwise in conformity with the provisions of this Act;

and it shall be the function of the Certifying Officer or appellate authority to adjudicate upon
the fairness or reasonableness of the provisions of any standing orders.

In Associated Cement Ltd. v. P.D. Vyas, the Supreme Court has discussed the word
'adjudicate' appearing in Section 4 of the Act. It held that the word 'adjudicates' used in
Section 4 of the Act indicates without doubt that the Certifying Officer will apply and decide
as to the fairness and reasonableness of any standing orders only when the parties are at issue
on such question. Thus, in the absence of objections to the standing orders as submitted by
the management, the standing orders as filed have to be certified.

The Court further held:

“The cumulative effect of the provisions of the Act is that the Certifying Officer
has to be satisfied that the draft standing orders deal with every matter set out in
the Schedule and are otherwise in conformity with the provisions of the Act”.

12 | P a g e
 Before certifying the draft standing orders, the Certifying Officer should ensure that
the draft standing orders are reasonable and fair. The certified standing orders providing
abandonment of employment when a workman absents for 10 consecutive days will not be
legal. Termination an employee after 15 years of service as stipulated in the standing orders
will standing orders will be legal.

2.2 CERTIFICATION AND APPEALS OF STANDING ORDERS-

SECTION 5, 6

 CERTIFICATION OF STANDING ORDER- SECTION 5

The aim and objective of drafting a standing order and its certification are to
regulate the terms and conditions of employment. The process provides that, after
certification, the order will be binding on the employees in that employment.

The Supreme Court in the case of Barauni Refinery Pragatisheel v. Indian Oil
Corporation Ltd. (1990) held that no modification can be made to the standing orders when
a settlement related to them is pending or in operation.

In another case, Hyderabad Allwyn Ltd. v. Add. Ind. Tribunal, Labour Court,
Hyderabad (1990), employer had the discretion under the certified standing order to retire a
workman at the age of 58 years or at the completion of 35 years of full service. This was held
binding on all workers working in that employment, whether prior to the standing order or
after its certification.

 APPEALS- SECTION 6

Section 6 of the Act makes provision for an appeal against the order of the Certifying
Officer, Sub-section (1) provides that any employer. workman, trade union or other
prescribed representatives of the workmen aggrieved by the order of the Certifying Officer
under sub-section (2) of Section 5 may, within thirty days from the date on which copies are
sent under sub-section (3) of that section, appeal to the appellate authority, and the appellate
authority, whose decision shall be final, shall by order in writing confirm the standing orders
either in the form certified by the Certifying Officer or after amending the said standing
orders by making such modifications thereof or additions thereto as it thinks necessary to
render the standing orders certifiable under this Act.

13 | P a g e
 The limitation period for making an appeal is thirty days from the date on which the
copy of certified standing orders has been sent to the employer and to the trade union or other
prescribed representative of the workmen.

In S.S. Light Railway Co. v. S.S. Railway Workers,' the Supreme Court has held that
the certified standing orders or modification thereof as finalized by the appellate authority
cannot be so challenged in a civil court. Court has held that the certified standing orders or
modifications thereof However, the finality given to the appellate authority's order is subject
to modifications of those very standing orders certified by him.

2.3 OPERATION, REGISTER AND POSTING OF STANDING ORDERS-

SECTION 7, 8, 9

 OPERATION OF STANDING ORDERS

Section 7 of the Act provides provision relating to the date of the operation of the
standing orders. According to this section standing orders shall, unless an appeal is preferred
under Section 6, come into operation on the expiry of thirty days from the date on which
authenticated copies thereof are sent under sub-section (3) of Section 5, or where an appeal as
aforesaid is preferred, on the expiry of seven days from the date on which copies of the order
of the appellate authority are sent under sub-section (2) of Section 6.

 REGISTER OF STANDING ORDERS

Section 8 of the Act makes it obligatory for the Certifying Officer to file a copy of the
standing orders in the register. It provides that a copy of all standing orders as finally certified
under this Act shall be filed by the Certifying Officer in a register in the prescribed form
maintained for the purpose, and the Certifying Officer shall furnish a copy thereof to any
person applying therefor on payment of the prescribed fee.

 POSTING OF STANDING ORDERS

Under Section 9 of the Act the employer is bound to post the certified standing orders
at prominent places. This section lays down that the text of the standing orders as finally
certified under this Act shall be prominently posted by the employer in English and in the
language understood by the majority of his workmen on special boards to be maintained for
the purpose at or near the entrance through which the majority of the workmen enter the
industrial establishment and, in all departments, thereof where, the workmen are employed.

14 | P a g e
2.4 MODIFICATION, POWERS OF CERTIFYING OFFICER AND
ORAL EVIDENCE- SECTION 10,11,12

 MODIFICATION OF STANDING ORDER

The provisions relating to duration and modification of standing orders have been laid
down under Section 10 of the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 10 provides that standing orders
finally
certified under this Act shall not, except on agreement between the employer and the
workmen, or a trade union or other representative body of the workmen, be liable to
modification until the expiry of six months from the date on which the standing orders or the
last modifications thereof came into operation.

In Management Shahdara (Delhi) v. S.S. Railway Workers’ Union (1968), the

standing order related to the termination of service of a permanent employee was modified.
After the modification, the employer was required to give reasons for termination and
communicate the same to the employee with a month’s notice in advance. This case provided
the conditions for the modification of standing orders. An application for modification can be
made:

 Where there has been any change in the circumstances.

 Where the last certified standing order resulted in inconvenience, hardship, etc.

 Where a fact was not considered during the time of the certification process.

 Where the applicant feels the need for modification and that it will be beneficial.
Further, in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Joint Chief Labour
Commissioner (1989), the model standing order mentioned the age of retirement as 58 years,
but the workmen demanded to modify it to 60 years. It was held that the authority has
jurisdiction to modify such a standing order that is in conflict with the model standing order
only on the condition that the modification must be fair and reasonable.

15 | P a g e
  POWERS OF CERTIFYING OFFICER

Section 11 gives the powers of certifying authority under the Act. It provides that such
authority will have all the powers of a civil court to:

 Receive evidence,
 Administer oath,
 Enforce attendance of witnesses,
 Compel discovery and production of documents.

 ORAL EVIDENCE IN CONTRADICTION OF STANDING ORDERS NOT

ADMISSIBLE

Section 12 lays down that no oral evidence having the effect of adding to or otherwise
varying or contradicting standing orders as finally certified under this Act shall be admitted in
any Court.
The provision bars admissibility of any oral evidence in any court that is in
contradiction of certified standing orders. It implies that oral testimony cannot be received to
contradict, vary, add to or subtract from the terms of a valid written instrument.
Allahabad High Court in J.K. Cotton Manufacturers v. J.N. Tiwari, has held that in
case of a conflict between general conditions of employment contained in standing orders and
special terms contained in a written contract, the term of the special contract will prevail.

16 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 3

INTERPRETATION OF STANDING ORDER & INDUSTRIES TO

WHICH THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY

3.1 INTERPRETATION OF STANDING ORDER: -

Section 13A deals with the question of interpretation of standing orders. It provides
that if any question arises as to the application or interpretation of a standing order certified
under this Act, it can be referred either by the employer or by a workman or a trade union or
other representative body of the workmen to a labour court constituted under the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, and specified for the disposal of such proceeding by the appropriate
Government by notification in the Official Gazette. The labour court to which the question is
so referred shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, decide the question
and such decision shall be final and binding on the parties.

The Labour Court to which the question or dispute is referred will give parties an
opportunity to be heard and then decide the issue. The function of such a court is limited to
questions related to the application or interpretation of standing orders. It cannot address the
issue of violations of rights and obligations under the standing orders. The Supreme Court in
the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Krishna Kant (1995)
observed that the standing orders that are certified do not come under delegated or
subordinate legislation under the Act. They provide the conditions of employment that are
binding on both the employer and the employee.

3.2 INDUSTRIES TO WHICH THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY: -

The Act aims at making it mandatory for employers to mention their working
conditions to employees, deduce them in writing, and get the consent of the employees in
order to prevent and reduce industrial disputes and chaos. It is applicable to all the industries
established in India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and having 100 or more
employees in any month of the preceding twelve months. However, there are certain
exceptions, i.e., industries to which the Act does not apply. These are:

17 | P a g e
 Industries covered under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946.
 Industries covered under the M.P. Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946.
 According to Section 13B of the Act, certain industries that are regulated by the
following rules and regulations are not covered under the Act:
a. The fundamental and supplementary rules,
b. The Civil Service (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules,
c. The Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules,
d. The Revised Leave Rules,
e. The Civil Service Regulations,
f. The Civilians in Defence Service (Classification, Control and Appeal)
Rules,
g. The Indian Railway Establishment Code,
h. Any other rules and regulations notified in the Official Gazette by the
appropriate government.

18 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 4

POWER TO EXEMPT, DELEGATION AND MAKE RULES

(SECTION 14 &15)

4.1 POWER TO EXEMPT-SECTION 14

Section 14 of the Act empowers the appropriate Government to exempt any
industrial establishment or class of industrial establishment from the application of all or any
of the provisions of the Act by making a notification in the Official Gazette. This exemption
may be made with or without conditions.
In Raman Nambisan v. Madras State Electricity Board, Madras High Court has
observed that Section 14 enables the government to exempt any industrial establishment, or
class of establishments from all or of provisions of the Act and not a section of the industrial
establishment.

4.2 DELEGATION OF POWERS-SECTION 14A

Section 14A of the Act deals with the delegation of powers by the appropriate
Government for the purpose of the Act. It provides that the appropriate Government may, by
notification in the official Gazette, delegate any power exercisable by it in the Act or any
rules made thereunder in relation to such matters and subject to such conditions as may be
specified in the notification.
Where the appropriate Government is the Central Government, the powers may be exercised
by-
(1) such officer; or
(2) authority subordinate to the Central Government or by State Government, or
(3) such officer or authority subordinate to the State Government, as may be specified
in the notification.
Further where the appropriate Government is a State Government, by such officer or
authority subordinate to the State Government as may be specified in the notification.
4.3POWER TO MAKE RULES-SECTION 15
Section 15 of the Act deals with the rule making power of the appropriate
Government. It provides that-

19 | P a g e
(1) The appropriate Government may, after previous publication, by notification in the
Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of them foregoing power, such rules
may-

(a) prescribe additional matters to be included in the Schedule, and the procedure to be
followed in modifying standing orders certified under this Act in accordance with such
addition;

(b) set out model standing orders for the purposes of this Act;

(c) prescribe the procedure of Certifying Officers and appellate authorities;

(d) prescribed the fee which may be charged for copies of standing order entered in the
register of standing orders;

(e) provide for any other matter which is to be or may be prescribed:

Provided that before any rules are made under clause (a) representatives of both
employers and workmen shall be consulted by the appropriate Government.

(3) Every rule made by the Central Government under this section shall be laid as soon as
may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament while it is in session for a total
period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive
sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the
successive sessions aforesaid both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or
both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only
in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so however that any such
modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously
done under that rule.

20 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 5
ROLE OF JUDICIARY

 M/S Lakshmi Precision Screws Ltd. v. Ram Bhagat (2002)

FACTS OF THE CASE
According to the standing order, if a workman is absent for 10 consecutive days, he
will be deemed to have left the job. In this case, a notice was issued by the appellant after a
workman was absent for 4 days, asking him to join the work within 48 hours. His
representation was rejected, and he was removed from the work.

ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE CASE

Whether the removal of a worker from his employment is valid and justified.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

The Supreme Court held that the appellant acted in an arbitrary manner by issuing the
notice to the workman in just 4 days, while the standing order gave the provision of 10
consecutive days of absence. Moreover, he was not given the opportunity to present his case
and give reasons for his absence. It was also observed that the principles of natural justice are
one of the requirements of standing orders and must be adhered to. The appeal of the
appellant was thus dismissed.

 N.D.M.C. v. Mohd. Shamim (2003)

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, a person was employed as Khalasi in the electricity department of the
New Delhi Municipal Committee (N.M.D.C.). There were no standing orders, and so the
respondents pleaded that model standing orders were applicable to them. He was relieved
from his duties and employment by an order from the petitioner without stating any reasons.
As a result, he challenged the order on the ground that it violated the model standing order.

21 | P a g e
ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE CASE
Whether the order violated the model standing order.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

The Industrial Tribunal in this case set aside the order passed by the petitioner, which
was challenged in the High Court. It was observed that a permanent employee is one who is
employed on a permanent basis and has completed the probationary period according to the
model standing order. It was held by the High Court that the respondent does not fall into the
category of a permanent employee. Further, it said that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to
entertain this application. However, the Court considered that the respondent had died, and so
it was held that 50% of the wages that he drew during the pendency of the case would not be
recovered from his family and representatives.

 Transport Manager v. Vilas Sanu Deokar and Ors. (2003)

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, the respondents were employed as drivers by the petitioners. Because of
some misconduct, they were charged, and an inquiry was conducted against them. During this
time, the petitioner did not give them any work, and a ‘no duty order’ was issued against
them. As a result, they filed a complaint on the ground that the order issued against them
amounted to a suspension from work and that they must be given a subsistence allowance.
The industrial court ordered the employer to pay them a subsistence allowance, which was
challenged by them.

ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE CASE

Whether the order given by the industrial court is correct or not.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

The Court observed that if badli workers are not given work by the employer and a no
duty order is issued against them, it does not amount to a suspension from work. The
contract of employment in this case comes into force on the day he is given employment,
unlike in other cases where the worker has the vested right to secure work from the employer

22 | P a g e
every day. Thus, it was held that if a badli worker is not given work, no question of
subsistence allowance arises.

 Vijaya Bank v. Shyamal Kumar Lodh (2010)

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this case, an employee of Vijaya Bank filed an application before the Labour Court
constituted by the state government for the computation of a subsistence allowance. The
appellant, on the other hand, argued that the Labour Court has no jurisdiction as it is not
constituted by the appropriate government, which is the Central Government. This objection
was overruled by the Labour Court and upheld by the High Court. As a result, an appeal was
filed with the Supreme Court.

ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE CASE

Whether the appeal is maintainable and whether the objection raised by the appellant is valid.

JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT

The Supreme Court observed that according to Section 10-A(2) of the Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, a Labour Court has the jurisdiction to try and
decide any issue or dispute related to subsistence allowance arising in the establishment
situated within its local limits. Further, it was observed that though the employee filed an
application with incorrect labels and wrong provisions, this does not affect the jurisdiction of
the court. The court still has jurisdiction to try the matter. The appeal was thus dismissed.

23 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that the Act has been able to prevent and reduce the problems
faced by employees and workmen. It regulated the working hours, disciplinary actions, and
other conditions of employment. This reduced the freedom of employers to hire workers on
any terms and conditions. These conditions were usually harsh, and the workers did not have
any option but to accept them in order to earn a living. Due to the doctrine of laissez faire, the
government could not intervene in such matters. But with the introduction of the concept of
the welfare state, there has been a change in ideology. The aim of the government in this
regard now is to secure good working conditions and a decent standard of living with the help
of social security measures.

However, with the enactment of the Act, the situation has changed, and there has been
an improvement in the terms and conditions of employment. Workers now enjoy a friendly
working environment with regulated wages and time for rest. The contract of employment
signed by them contains all the clauses and provisions that provide conditions for their
employment. It can be said that the Act is social legislation enacted for the welfare of the
working class. With the help of such enactments, the government seeks to protect the interests
of employees and undertakes to establish harmonious relations between employer and
employee. Because of such ideologies and measures, one who provides work is no longer a
master, and one who works is no longer a servant. There is a relationship between employer
and employee.

24 | P a g e
 REFERENCES

 BIBLOGRAPHY

1. LABOUR & INDUSTRIAL LAWS BY DR. SUNIL YADAV

2. LABOUR & INDUSTRIAL LAWS BY DR. AVTAR SINGH
3. THE INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT (STANDING ORDERS) ACT, 1946,
NO. 20, ACTS OF PARLIAMENT, 1946

 WEBLOGRAPHY

1. https://lawcorner.in

2. https://legalstudymaterial.com

3. https://enterslice.com

4. https://blog.ipleaders.in

5. https://indianlawportal.co.in

25 | P a g e