https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459689 The SC addressed challenges to orders under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 regarding wage payment during lockdown. While the contested order dated 29.03.2020 requiring employers to pay full wages during establishment closures was withdrawn on 17.05.2020, the court examined its validity for the 50-day period it remained operative. The SC acknowledged adverse effects on both employers and employees during lockdown, noting varying financial capacities of establishments. Rather than ruling definitively on constitutional violations, the court encouraged negotiated settlements between parties regarding wage payments for the lockdown period, suggesting labour authorities facilitate conciliation where direct negotiations fail. The court emphasized mutual dependence between industry and workers, promoting collaborative resolution over rigid enforcement of the withdrawn order. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459689 The SC addressed challenges to orders under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 regarding wage payment during lockdown. While the contested order dated 29.03.2020 requiring employers to pay full wages during establishment closures was withdrawn on 17.05.2020, the court examined its validity for the 50-day period it remained operative. The SC acknowledged adverse effects on both employers and employees during lockdown, noting varying financial capacities of establishments. Rather than ruling definitively on constitutional violations, the court encouraged negotiated settlements between parties regarding wage payments for the lockdown period, suggesting labour authorities facilitate conciliation where direct negotiations fail. The court emphasized mutual dependence between industry and workers, promoting collaborative resolution over rigid enforcement of the withdrawn order. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 12 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459689