{"id":385858,"date":"2026-06-02T12:00:53","date_gmt":"2026-06-02T06:30:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=385858"},"modified":"2026-06-02T11:38:09","modified_gmt":"2026-06-02T06:08:09","slug":"ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code"},"content":{"rendered":"<style>\n.animate-charcter{background-image: linear-gradient(-225deg, #231557 0%, #44107a 29%, #ff1361 67%, #fff800 100%); background-size: 200% auto; -webkit-background-clip: text; -webkit-text-fill-color: transparent; animation: textclip 0s linear infinite;}\n@keyframes textclip {to {background-position: 200% center;}}\n<\/style>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Kerala High Court:<\/span> In a writ appeal challenging the constitutionality of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9003170989\" target=\"_blank\">Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act, 2026<\/a> (Amending Act), that provided for the continuation of the existing Labour Tribunals till the Tribunals and authorities under the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">Industrial Relations Code, 2020<\/a> (IR Code) become functional, the Division Bench of <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Devan Ramachandran*<\/span> and Basant Balaji, JJ., while dismissing the appeal, affirmed the judgment of the learned Single Judge and upheld the validity of Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629778\" target=\"_blank\">104(1-A)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code, 2020<\/a> allowing existing Labour Tribunals to continue, observing that it constitutes a necessary mechanism to ensure continuity of adjudication until new tribunals are constituted. The Court observed that,<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-left: 36pt; margin-bottom: 3%; font-style: italic;\">&#8220;Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629778\" target=\"_blank\">104(1-A)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> operates as a non-obstante provision which provides that the statutory authorities under the repealed Acts would continue to function till the tribunals and other authorities become functional under it. If declared unconstitutional, it would lead to a situation leading to complete cessation of the judicial functions.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Also Read:<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/17\/government-notified-industrial-relations-code-amendment-2026-explained\/\">Industrial Relations Code Amendment 2026 Explained<\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Background<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The appellants instituted proceedings seeking a declaration that the Amending Act, particularly the insertion of Section 104(1-A), is unconstitutional, arbitrary, and ultra vires the provisions of the IR Code. They also alleged violations of Articles <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574870\" target=\"_blank\">14<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574949\" target=\"_blank\">21<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\">Constitution<\/a>. The appellants further sought that a writ of prohibition be issued, to restrain Labour Courts, Industrial Tribunals and National Tribunals constituted under the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002756734\" target=\"_blank\">Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> (ID Act) from adjudicating any existing or new cases under the IR Code. The Single Judge had rejected the challenge and upheld the provision, finding no constitutional infirmity. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants preferred the present writ appeal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The appellants contended that Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629778\" target=\"_blank\">104(1-A)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> was manifestly illegal since it permitted earlier tribunals and judicial forums constituted under repealed enactments to continue functioning. It was argued that this defeated the mandate of Sections <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629815\" target=\"_blank\">44(7)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629823\" target=\"_blank\">51(1)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> which provided for mandatory transfer of all cases to forums which had multiple members, and not single, as were permitted by the repealed Statutes. The appellants asserted that such continuation results in inconsistency within the statutory framework and undermines legislative intent. It was further contended that IR Code also curtailed the powers of the States thereby creating legal issues.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In response, the respondents submitted that Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629778\" target=\"_blank\">104(1-A)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> was only a transitional provision providing for adjudication of matters pending the establishment of the Tribunals under it. It was argued that striking down the provision would lead to a situation where there would be no tribunals or forums to adjudicate any of the existing disputes, and it would culminate in a virtual &#8220;cryonic freeze&#8221;, thus bringing disservice to litigants, rather than any benefit to them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Also Read:<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/28\/ker-hc-industrial-relations-code-amendment-act-2026-upheld-continuation-of-labour-tribunals-not-arbitrary\/\">Continuation of existing Labour Tribunals not arbitrary: Ker HC<\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Analysis<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court relied on <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Shayara Bano<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Union of India<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/rLPetu3z\">(2017) 9 SCC 1<\/a>, wherein it was observed that it is only in the case of manifestly and shockingly arbitrary provisions, that the jurisdiction of Courts is normally attracted.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court opined that Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629778\" target=\"_blank\">104(1-A)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> operates as a non-obstante provision which provides that the functionaries and statutory authorities under the repealed Acts would continue to function till the Tribunals and other authorities become functional under it. The Court noted that the issues relating to the constitution of the Tribunals and statutory authorities under the IR Code are pending before the Supreme Court and that interim orders have also been issued by it, and their constitution is underway.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court observed that the impugned provision merely enables the existing tribunals and statutory authorities to continue, thereby creating a transitory mechanism, for the period until new tribunals and statutory authorities are brought into existence. If declared unconstitutional, it would lead to a situation leading to complete cessation of the judicial functions as required either under the repealed Acts or under the IR Code, which would certainly not help any interest, be that of the litigant, or that of the State.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Regarding the alleged inconsistency with Sections <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629815\" target=\"_blank\">44(7)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000629823\" target=\"_blank\">51(1)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000630029\" target=\"_blank\">IR Code<\/a> mandating transfer of cases and constitution of new tribunals, the Court observed that it is precisely during the time it takes for the Tribunals to be so constituted, that the transitory provision applies.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Also Read:<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/23\/ker-hc-upholds-continuation-of-existing-labour-courts-and-tribunals\/\">Ker HC upholds continuation of existing labour courts and tribunals<\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Decision<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Accordingly, the Court did not find anything wrong, particularly when there was no case for the appellants that the legislature did not have the competence to legislate in the manner it has done. Consequently, the Court affirmed the views of the Single Judge and dismissed the appeal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\"><span style=\"font-style: italic;\">M.K. Suresh Kumar<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Union of India<\/span>, WA No. 1051 of 2026, decided on 22-5-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%; text-indent: 18pt; border: 2px solid black; border-radius: 10px; text-align: center; width: 50%; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; background-color: #DCDCDC;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">*Judgment authored by: Justice Devan Ramachandran<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Appellants:<\/span> A. Abdul Nabeel, Advocate.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Respondents:<\/span> Amal Parthasaradhy, CGC, P. Sreekumar, ASGI<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">The Kerala High Court upheld Section 104(1-A) of the Industrial Relations Code as a valid transitory provision, holding that allowing existing Labour Tribunals to continue until new bodies are constituted is neither manifestly arbitrary nor unconstitutional.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67538,"featured_media":385859,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[59243,78032,103202,54006,103200,43884,83931,54756,2523,103204,103203,105867,103201],"class_list":["post-385858","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-article-14-constitution","tag-article-21-constitution","tag-continuation-of-labour-tribunals","tag-industrial-disputes-act-1947","tag-industrial-relations-code-amendment-act-2026","tag-industrial-relations-code-2020","tag-justice-basant-balaji","tag-justice-devan-ramachandran","tag-Kerala_High_Court","tag-labour-law-amendment","tag-manifestly-arbitrary","tag-non-obstante-provision","tag-section-1041-a-ir-code"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ker HC upholds validity of Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.\" \/>\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\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sunaina\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sunaina\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Sunaina\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f\"},\"headline\":\"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":809,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Article 14 Constitution\",\"Article 21 Constitution\",\"continuation of Labour Tribunals\",\"Industrial Disputes Act 1947\",\"Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act 2026\",\"Industrial Relations Code 2020\",\"Justice Basant Balaji\",\"Justice Devan Ramachandran\",\"Kerala High Court\",\"labour law amendment\",\"manifestly arbitrary\",\"non-obstante provision\",\"Section 104(1-A) IR Code\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ker HC upholds validity of Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f\"},\"description\":\"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"validity of S. 104(1-A) upheld\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/02\\\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code\"}]},{\"@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\\\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f\",\"name\":\"Sunaina\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sunaina\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/sunaina\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ker HC upholds validity of Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 | SCC Times","description":"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.","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\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code","og_description":"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sunaina","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sunaina","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/"},"author":{"name":"Sunaina","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f"},"headline":"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code","datePublished":"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/"},"wordCount":809,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp","keywords":["Article 14 Constitution","Article 21 Constitution","continuation of Labour Tribunals","Industrial Disputes Act 1947","Industrial Relations Code (Amendment) Act 2026","Industrial Relations Code 2020","Justice Basant Balaji","Justice Devan Ramachandran","Kerala High Court","labour law amendment","manifestly arbitrary","non-obstante provision","Section 104(1-A) IR Code"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/","name":"Ker HC upholds validity of Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp","datePublished":"2026-06-02T06:30:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f"},"description":"Kerala High Court upholds validity of transitory provision under Section 104(1-A) Industrial Relations Code, 2020 allowing existing labour tribunals to continue, rejecting challenge of manifest arbitrariness and ensuring continuity of adjudication.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"validity of S. 104(1-A) upheld"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/06\/02\/ker-hc-upholds-validity-of-transitory-provision-under-section-1041-a-ir-code-2020-ker-hc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Striking Down Transitory Provision Would Cause Cryonic Freeze in Labour Justice: Kerala HC Upholds Section 104(1-A) of Industrial Relations Code"}]},{"@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\/34835827e9e9e8def4f8c83ccef5727f","name":"Sunaina","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a354bf6ec74d2631ada87f05d4d0974c39ba4fa4100c0cd4972b767e8824247?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sunaina"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/sunaina\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/validity-of-S.-1041-A-upheld.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385858","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\/67538"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=385858"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385858\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":385862,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385858\/revisions\/385862"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/385859"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=385858"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=385858"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=385858"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}