https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173920 Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act was construed as applying to reinstatement awards made before 21 August 1984, so long as the awards had not attained finality and were under challenge in higher courts. The provision was treated as a beneficial measure designed to protect workmen from hardship caused by delay during employer-initiated proceedings, and its language was held not to confine it to post-commencement awards. A restrictive reading was rejected because it would frustrate the legislative object, while the earlier approach to a different provision conferring new jurisdiction was distinguished. The workman's entitlement to wages during pendency was therefore affirmed. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Sep 2015 16:46:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173920 Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act was construed as applying to reinstatement awards made before 21 August 1984, so long as the awards had not attained finality and were under challenge in higher courts. The provision was treated as a beneficial measure designed to protect workmen from hardship caused by delay during employer-initiated proceedings, and its language was held not to confine it to post-commencement awards. A restrictive reading was rejected because it would frustrate the legislative object, while the earlier approach to a different provision conferring new jurisdiction was distinguished. The workman's entitlement to wages during pendency was therefore affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173920