TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether refusal of approval under section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 renders the dismissal order ineffective so that the workman is entitled to reinstatement and consequential benefits as of right, and what remedy is available if the employer does not restore him to service.
Analysis: Section 33 is intended to maintain industrial status quo during pending proceedings while permitting disciplinary action in appropriate cases subject to statutory control. Where approval under section 33(2)(b) is sought after dismissal or discharge for matters unconnected with the pending dispute, the order remains in an inchoate state until approval is granted. If approval is refused on merits, the dismissal becomes invalid and inoperative in law and is treated as non est, with the result that the workman is deemed to continue in service and is entitled to the normal consequences of that status. The employer is bound to treat the workman as continuing in service and to extend the attendant benefits; if that is not done, enforcement can be sought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The refusal of approval on the ground that no prima facie case was made out or that victimisation or unfair labour practice was established supports this consequence.
Conclusion: Refusal of approval under section 33(2)(b) makes the dismissal unenforceable and the workman is entitled to reinstatement and consequential benefits; the remedy lies in enforcing that right by writ petition if the employer does not comply.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
