{"id":275122,"date":"2022-10-06T13:00:47","date_gmt":"2022-10-06T07:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=275122"},"modified":"2022-10-06T13:00:47","modified_gmt":"2022-10-06T07:30:47","slug":"kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">&#160; &#160;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\"><b>Kerala High Court<\/b>: In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001532588\">33(2)(b)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002756734\">Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> (&#8216;the Act&#8217;), Mohammed Nias C.P., J. has observed that the respondent has not properly considered the application under Section 33(2)(b) and it is necessary to question and remit the matter to the authority, to consider the application afresh after hearing the management and the workmen and to take a decision in accordance with law.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">In this case, the petitioner, a company having tea and rubber estates in Kerala, initiated disciplinary proceedings against the respondent\/workman, and finding him guilty in the enquiry report and therefore, a punishment of dismissal was imposed upon him. Further, the petitioner filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act in view of the pendency of the industrial dispute, however, the said application was rejected stating that in view of the pending dispute raised at the instance of the Union, the application filed by the petitioner cannot be allowed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court viewed that the order cannot be sustained as the consideration mandated under Section 33(2)(b) has not been done while rejecting the prayer for approval. The Court took note of the ruling in <i>John D&#8217;Souza<\/i> v. <i>Karnataka SRTC<\/i>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/9Q20xTSs\">(2019) 18 SCC 47<\/a>, wherein it was held that <b>&#8220;the enquiry contemplated under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act was summary in nature to see prima facie if the domestic enquiry was fair and just, and whether the employee was given a reasonable opportunity in compliance with the principles of natural justice and the object behind such a provision is to ensure that pending adjudication of a dispute, the employer should not act with vengeance leading to further industrial dispute&#8221;.<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court observed that Section 33 of the Act, as it stood prior to 1956 amendment, virtually prohibited a change of service conditions to the prejudice of workman or discharge or dismissal of the workman during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings or any other proceedings before a Labour Court or Tribunal in respect of an industrial dispute. Further, the object was obviously to protect the workman concerned against victimization for having raised an industrial dispute and further to ensure adjudication of pending industrial proceedings in a peaceful atmosphere.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">It was also observed that after the amendment of Section 33 in the year 1956, there is a clear distinction between the action proposed to be taken by the employer regarding any matter connected with the dispute on one hand, and action proposed to be taken regarding a matter not connected with the dispute pending before the authority.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">Moreover, it was viewed that Section 33(1) deals with matters connected with the pending dispute and imposes a ban on change of service conditions or discharge or dismissal except with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending and Section 33(2) deals with the alterations in the conditions of service as well as discharge or dismissal of workman concerned in any pending dispute where such alteration or such discharge or dismissal is in regard to a matter not connected to the pending dispute. Thus, it is a permission seeking approval of the action already taken.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court further viewed that the limited enquiry contemplated under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act is only to find whether a proper domestic enquiry has been held to prove the misconduct attributed to the workman and whether he has been afforded reasonable opportunity to defend himself in consonance with the principles of natural justice, therefore, the object of such an enquiry is to lift the veil to find out that there is no hidden motive to punish the workman or the act is an abortive attempt to punish him for a non-existing misconduct. Further, the Proviso to Section 33(2)(b) affords protection to a workman to safeguard his interest and it is a shield against victimization or unfair practice by the employer during the pendency of an industrial dispute when the relationship between them is strained.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Midland Rubber Produce Company Ltd v. Uthayasuriyan, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/P78l33hE\">2022 SCC OnLine Ker 4842<\/a>, decided on 30.09.2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Advocate P. Benny Thomas<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Advocate P. Gopinath<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Advocate K. John Mathai<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Counsel for Respondent: Advocate Thomas Abraham<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Government Pleader Unnikrishna Kaimal<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#160; &#160; Kerala High Court: In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":268918,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[48474,7651,2523,9931,5051,2805,52207,43792],"class_list":["post-275122","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-discharge","tag-dismissal","tag-Kerala_High_Court","tag-labour-court","tag-misconduct","tag-natural_justice","tag-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act","tag-unfair-practice"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-10-06T07:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-06T07:30:47+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Kerala High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman | SCC Times","description":"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman","og_description":"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-10-06T07:30:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/","name":"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg","datePublished":"2022-10-06T07:30:47+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Kerala High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/06\/kerala-high-court-section-332b-of-the-industrial-disputes-act-1947-labour-court-discharge-dismissal-unfair-practice-misconduct-natural-justice-legal-research-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kerala High Court| Object of an enquiry under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is to lift the veil to find out any hidden motive in punishing the workman"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":354262,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/23\/kar-hc-finding-under-section-33-id-act-as-res-judicata\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":0},"title":"Finding under S. 33(2)(b) ID Act on fairness of domestic enquiry operates as res judicata in Labour Court proceedings: Karnataka High Court","author":"Editor","date":"July 23, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Authority under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 cannot adjudicate on the merits of the finding in the domestic enquiry or on the penalty, as it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the merits of the findings in a domestic enquiry. Those questions have to be adjudicated\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Section 33 ID Act res judicata","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Section-33-ID-Act-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Section-33-ID-Act-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Section-33-ID-Act-res-judicata.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Section-33-ID-Act-res-judicata.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":380983,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/14\/karnataka-high-court-condonation-delay-under-section-33c1-id-act-without-separate-application\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":1},"title":"Delay under Section 33-C(1) ID Act Can Be Condoned Without Separate Application: Karnataka HC","author":"Editor","date":"April 14, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is well settled that, in case of conflict between form and substance, substance must prevail, unless the law expressly mandates strict adherence to the form as well.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delay under Section 33-C(1) ID Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/delay-under-Section-33-C1-ID-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/delay-under-Section-33-C1-ID-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/delay-under-Section-33-C1-ID-Act.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/delay-under-Section-33-C1-ID-Act.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197470,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/existence-of-an-employer-employee-relationship-is-a-sine-qua-non-for-protection-under-section-33-of-industrial-disputes-act-1947\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":2},"title":"Existence of an \u2018employer-employee\u2019 relationship is a sine qua non for protection under Section 33 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 26, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of S.C. Gupte, J. allowed a writ petition filed by \u2018IDBI Bank Ltd.\u2019 and dismissed the order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (Mumbai) passed in an application preferred by the respondent- workers union under Section 33 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":236399,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/28\/bom-hc-will-strict-rules-of-pleadings-as-applicable-for-suits-filed-under-cpc-be-applicable-under-industrial-disputes-act-as-well-hc-elaborates\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":3},"title":"Bom HC | Will strict rules of pleadings as applicable for suits filed under CPC be applicable under Industrial Disputes Act as well? HC elaborates","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 28, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0Anil S. Kilor, J., reiterated that the strict rule of pleadings as applicable to civil suits is not applicable under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner's application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was rejected by the Labour Court, Nagpur and the Judgments and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":220034,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/26\/raj-hc-employee-has-statutory-right-to-receive-amount-of-wages-last-drawn-even-if-execution-of-an-award-for-the-same-has-stayed\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":4},"title":"Raj HC | Employee has statutory right to receive amount of wages last drawn even if execution of an award for the same has stayed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 26, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: Mohammad Rafiq, J. disposed of an application seeking a grant of last wages drawn by the employee under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In the present case, the respondent-employee had moved an application under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for receiving the amount of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":308371,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/04\/cal-hc-affirms-directors-liability-under-section-32-of-industrial-disputes-act-1947-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":275122,"position":5},"title":"Calcutta High Court affirms Director\u2019s liability under Section 32 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; directs compliance of compensation order","author":"Ritu","date":"December 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 \u201cis a beneficial legislation, for the benefit of the workmen and not paying the compensation since 2007 is clearly an abuse of the process of law.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275122","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=275122"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275122\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/268918"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=275122"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=275122"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=275122"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}