Officer of Conciliation, as outlined in Section 4
It is possible for the relevant government to designate anybody it deems to be suitable in order for them to serve as conciliation officials. These officials are tasked with mediating and aiding the settlement of industrial audits.
Conciliation Boards are discussed in Section 5.
A reasonable government may talk to a Board of Conciliation in order to accelerate the settlement of an industrial dispute as a consequence of an announcement that was published in the Official Gazette. A Board will include an administrator in addition to two or four separate members, depending on what the government decides to require of it. Every person who is selected to speak at a gathering will be an independent individual, including the administrator, various persons, who will be people who have been allocated in equal numbers to talk to the party to the case, and every individual who has been chosen to speak at a gathering.
Courts of Inquiry Are Discussed In Section 6
The competent authority may, by means of notice, establish a court, which may consist of one or more persons. This authority does not settle conflicts; rather, it examines and inquires into the many enterprises that are already in existence. The report is used to inform the court’s decision on whether or not the issue should be submitted to the proper authorities for resolution. The court will normally hand down its decision within four to eight months, and the report will be handed in between four to eight months. This information originates from the British Industrial Court in the year 1990.
Qualifications to Serve on the Industrial Tribunal and the Jurisdiction of the Labour Court are Detailed in Section 7.
The Industrial Dispute Amendment Act and Miscellaneous Provision Amendment of 1956 included the addition of three bodies to help resolve disputes. These authorities included the Board of Officer and Conciliation. An award is the name given to the decision that is made by the authorities or adjudicators after they resolve a dispute. According to the provisions of Section 7, the government is required to designate an adjudicator who will adjudicate on issues concerning industrial disputes. A person is considered qualified to preside over a labour court if they have previously served as an additional district judge or district judge for a period of at least three years, a judge of a high court for any length of time, a preceding officer or member of a labour appellate tribunal constituted in accordance with the Appellate Tribunal Act of 1950, or a member of a labour court constituted in accordance with any state legislation. They must have served in a labour tribunal for a minimum of two years and a labour court established under any state statute for a minimum of five years. They should also have been a member of officer of grade B for not less than three years, or a deputy chief commissioner (central), or a joint commissioner of state legal department having a degree in law and at least seven years of experience in the labour department, including three years of experience as a conciliation officer. In addition, they are required to have been a member of officer of grade B for not less than three years. The lone member of the labour court is a person, and its scope of authority will encompass the issues detailed in Schedule 2. When it comes to mediating disagreements, the presiding officer may request the assistance of two assessors who have been appointed by the relevant government. In Section 7(c), the requirements of an officer are defined, and it states that an officer is no longer qualified if they have reached the age of 65 years following their appointment.
The Industrial Dispute Act, namely section 10(1), is the law that applies to issues that are included in Schedule 3 and fall within the jurisdiction of the tribunal. If there is an opinion of the competent government in the other direction, then the tribunal will be responsible for deciding matters relating to Schedule 2 as well. The credentials necessary to serve as a judge in an industrial tribunal are identical to those required to serve in a labour court, and the competent government may establish an industrial tribunal by publishing a notice in the official gazette.
Two cases have discussed the issue of what happens if an ex parte order or award is passed by a labour court or tribunal and the tribunal wants to set aside the judgement after the order has been published and enforced. These cases were Grindlays Bank vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal 1980 and Haryana Surat Malting Limited vs. Phoolchand 2018, both of which were decided by the Supreme Court. Both of these cases involved an ex parte order or award being passed by the labour court or tribunal. When the ex parte award or order is published and enforced by the tribunal or labour court, the authority in question is said to have become functus officio. This is the situation in the first scenario. On the other hand, in the most recent case that took place in 2018, it was ruled that an ex parte award may be overturned after it has been published or awarded by the court if there is any foundation that may be considered reasonable or acceptable. The party that has been harmed may seek relief under Section 136 of the Act even if there is no ex parte judgement.
As a consequence, the Indian government in 1947 enacted a law known as the Industrial Disputes Act. This Act ensures that there is peace and harmony among all industrial companies. In the event that a dispute does develop, the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act aid in settling the situation in a methodical way that ensures all parties are satisfied and that every decision that is made is fair and right.