For the efficient functioning of a working unit an amicable environment, cooperation between the workers and the employers, reasonable remuneration and proper working condition are the prerequisites. From the laissez faire to the ‘welfare state’, the socio-economic conditions have faced drastic changes, not only in India but also across the world. The industrial position that prevailed in the pre-independence era of India does not remain pristine. The industrial revolution in India brought with it certain inhumane as well as unjust aspects of the colonial era. To cope with these problems, industrial legislations were enacted in India. To keep pace with the changing socio-economic conditions in India, the Legislature as well as the Courts had to check the unfavourable growth of the industrial legislations.
During the 20th century a new branch of jurisprudence known as industrial jurisprudence has developed in our country industrial jurisprudence is a development of mainly post-independence period although its birth may be traced back to industrial revolution before independence it existed in rudimentary form in our country. The growth of industrial jurisprudence can significantly be noticed not only from increase in labour and industrial legislation but also from a large number of industrial laws matter decided by the supreme court and high courts it affects directly a considerable population of our country consisting of industrialist workmen and their families those who are affected indirectly constitute a large bulk of countries population this branch of law modified the traditional law relating to the master and servant and head cut down the old theory of laissez faire based upon the freedom of contract in the larger interest of the society because that theory was found wanting for the development of harmonious and amicable relations between the employer and employee. Individual contracts have been in many respect substituted by a standard form of statutory contract through legislation and judicial interpretation the traditional right of an employer to hire and fire his workman at his bill has been subjected to many restrain industrial tribunals can buy the award make a contract which is binding on both the parties creating new right and imposing new obligations arising out of the award there is no question of employer a green to the new contract it is binding even though it is an acceptable to him the creation of new obligation is not by the parties themselves either or both of them maybe opposite to it never the less it binds them does the idea of some authority making a contract for the workmen and the employer is a strange and a novel Idea and is foreign to the basic principle of law of contract Many problems like social problems like lawlessness in industries exploitation of relation between employee and employer such exploitation of labour rise to many serious social tension.
The concept of industrial jurisprudence in our country developed only after independence until Independence the change in attitude of the Government and the benevolent labour legislation only amelioration of the conditions of labour and it could hardly be said to be deal in Social justice to the working class the birth of industrial jurisprudence in our country maybe ascribed to the constitution of India which made more articulate and clear the Industrial Relations philosophy of republic of India this philosophy has awarded the broad and clear guidelines for development of our industrial jurisprudence and has the second India one step forward in her Quest of industrial harmony the Parliament and the Supreme Court has helped in shaping industrial jurisprudence the former through legislation and the latter as interpreter of a Labour Law.
EVOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA.
The evolution of Industrial Jurisprudence in India can be traced back to the period of post Independence. Before the Independence, the industrial jurisprudence existed in a rudimentary form. The paramount concern of the Pre-independence industrial jurisprudence was the amelioration of the working condition of the workers at the factories. There was hardly any deal with the social justice to the working class. It was only after the commencement of our Constitution, that the adequate provisions for the social justice to the workers were inserted.
Before the Independence, India was not only a great agricultural country, but also a manufacturing country. But the British Government, as a matter of their policies always tended to discourage the Indian industries. This led to a widespread nationalism in India, which laid emphasis on the boycott of the foreign goods. Further a non-cooperation movement saw its birth that is also called swadeshi movement, which emphasised on the use of indigenous goods and boycott of the foreign goods.
The aspect of industrialisation in India was based on the program of planning, which was accepted after thirties.
It is important to take into consideration that the plantation industry of Assam was the first to attract the industrial legislation. The situation there was that the employers exercised hard practices against the employees. The employees were not allowed to leave the tea gardens. A number of Acts were passed from 1863 onward, but they only protected the interests of the employers. Some other Act.
Trade Union Freedom:
One of the basic features for successful labour law of any economy is the freedom of trade union. The freedom signifies how the particular economy is free, open and liberal with such freedom the path of trade union for self-reliance; self-control inner and outer democracy shall get accelerated. In such social and economic society like India where still 44% of population are under the poverty line it is not expected by them to know the laws and strive hard for them here comes the gap which has to be filled by judiciary. In India the trade union are philosophy used in social lieu and economic exploitation, political oppression in such economy may at times even the trade union could be considered as the suspicious hence it is necessary for both the regulating and judicial process are considered as the major instrument for defeating and denying and controlling trade union freedom.
It tends to be said that in the before times in India the colonial Trade Union Act, 1926, and the different open public security laws. Fundamental Services Act, Criminal Law Amendment Act, The Indian Penal Code, The Police Act and the Criminal Procedure Code, are a couple of precedents, just such a state of mind hold on in the most recent many years of the twentieth century in the appearance of National Security Act, 1980 and the Essential Services Maintenance Act. In so far as Indian adjudicatory procedures as exemplified in the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and other work the board laws is concerned, it has been tilting towards social equity as opposed to exchange association freedoms. Considering above for economic development and improved industrial relations the productivity, evolution of Industrial jurisprudence is essential.
The Supreme Court and High court have played an important role in revolutionizing the methods, approaches and interpretations paving a way towards new industrial jurisprudence by plying the powers of judicial review. It is not merely the laws but there are even certain cases by introducing the new character and new action in course has strengthen the legal provision for labour law of India. Initially the demand of trade union on higher ages was dismissed by high round because of reason that court cannot alter the contractual obligation between the parties. But after the case of Western India Automobile Association Vs Industrial Tribunal social interest is considered prime for securing peace and harmony between employer and work me.
Supporting the above judgment in the case of State of Bihar vs Kameshwar the Supreme court of India very clearly advocated the new idea of social justice in form of general interest of the community.
Certain judiciary bodies the judges have made tremendous efforts for delivering justice for working class. Justice V.R Krishna Iyer made a philosophy that “the principles of the scientific management tend to value technical efficiency about the human factors may not hold goods in managing human beings who have clearly demonstrated in recent years that they cannot be treated a cog in the wheel of machinery. They would like to have responsibility and respectable place in society and also in industry where they work for about 100 years.
Right to Strike: The constitution, Courts and Adjudication.
In India many a times the strikes are the answer to many problem like lack of proper trade union consciousness or lack of legal awareness about the consequences of strikes or for non-payment of proper wages, stringent working conditions, failure of collective bargaining system and other methods of settlement of industrial dispute, involvement of political parties, dominating attitude of the management, failure in providing labour welfare and social security, the right to strike has also been recognized in all democratic societies reasonable restrain use of this proper is also identified. Further the employers also have the liberty to apply the weapon of lock – out in case people fail to comply with the regulations of agreement of employment. The diploma of freedom granted for its workout varies in line with the social, economic and political variations within the device for securing public interest, the hotel to strike or lock – out and in a few cases the duration of either problem to guidelines and policies or voluntarily agreed to via the parties or statutorily imposed this has been criterion underline the earlier legislation for regulating commercial relations within the country.
In case of Romesh Thappar there was an attempt made to include theory of connection within the ambit of constitution i.e., to imply right to strike within the confines of Article 19(1)(c). Similarly in case of All India Bank Employee’s Association Vs. Tribunal and others the right guaranteed by Art 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India does not carry with it concomitant right that unions formed for the protection of the interests of labour shall achieve their object such that any interference to such achievement by any law would be unconstitutional unless it could be justified under Article 19(4) of the Indian Constitution as being in the interest of public order or morality. The right under Article19(1)(c) extends only to the formation of an association or union concerned or as regards the steps which the union might take to achieve its object, they are subject to such laws and such laws cannot be tested under Article 19(4) of Indian Constitution.
T.K Rangarjan Vs State of Tamil Nadu
In this case the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed two important issues raised in this case
- It is a fundamental right to go on strike?
- In this case does the employee have statutory right to go on strike?
It is a fundamental right to go om strike ?
The Apex Court in the process of answering the same referred the judgments of previous cases of Kameswar Prasad and others Vs. State of Bihar and another wherein the Supreme Court held that there exists no fundamental right to strike. The Supreme Court quoted another judgment in the case of Radhey Sham Sharma Vs. The Post Master General, Central Circle, Nagpur. The fact of the case that the employees of the Telegraph Department of the Government went on strike from the midnight of July 11, 1960, throughout India and the petitioner was on duty on that day. As he went on strike, in the departmental enquiry, penalty was imposed on him. The same was challenged before the Hon’ble Court. In that context it was contended that Sec.3,4 and 5 of Essential Service Maintenance Ordinance No.1 of 1960 were violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed by clauses (a) and (b) of 19 (1) of the Indian Constitution. The court considered the said ordinance and held that Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the ordinances did not violate Fundamental Rights enshrined in Art 19(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution of India.
The Supreme Court concludes that there exists no fundamental right of Strike.
In the instant case, do the employees have a statutory right to go on strike?
The Supreme Court of India observes that there is no statutory provision empowering the employees to go on strike. Further it observes that there is prohibition to go on strikes under the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973. Rule 22 provides that “no government servant shall engage himself in strike on incitements there to or in similar activities” The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India did not impose a blanket ban on all strikes. The court further declares that the said strike to be illegal in view of Rule 22 which prohibits government servants from going on strike. Several decisions of the various High Courts in India as well as the Supreme Court itself have adverted to and positively affirmed the right to strike in so far as workmen are concerned.
- Western India Automobile Association Vs. Industrial Tribunal.
- State of Bihar Vs Kameshwar
- Romesh Thapper Case
- All India Bank Employee’s Association Vs Tribunal and Others
- Kameshwar Prasad and others Vs State of Bihar
- Radhey Sham Sharma Vs The Post Master General, Central, Circle, Nagar.
In light of the paper discussed the researcher has come to the conclusion that in India in spite of so much advancement in all the sector the laws need to be changed with upcoming Era industry has been clamouring for centre labour law reforms. the call for is for flexibility in terms of freedom to lease agreement labour, the freedom to retrench employees and close down undertakings without prior authorities’ endorsement, and the liberty to introduce technological adjustments that contain loss of employment. in addition, they need a liberal labour inspection gadget and a rational and cutting-edge machine of data compliance the employers may also have a case, at least with a number of the demands.
However, there are other compelling problems which hurt business members of the family governance at the plant stage, the resolution of which could also beautify the competitiveness of the companies. The employers appear to have forgotten this of their quest for labour flexibility. One core trouble is the absence of a relevant regulation offering for a mechanism to decide the collective bargaining agent. If there are multiple trade unions preventing for his or her respective rights it could cause the worsening of business members of the family governance, even though the agency enjoys labour flexibility. This has been tested by recent commercial conflicts. It far widely recognized that exchange unions, under positive conditions, should in truth make a contribution to the enhancement of productive performance and reduces transaction and tracking prices. The world financial institution has encouraged this lately. To the ILO, exchange unions are essential to a respectable and simply place of business. To be sure, there is “union” as there are “inefficient and fraudulent companies”.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at firstname.lastname@example.org