SRI DORAIRAJ SPINTEX versus R CHITTIBABU & ORS

SRI DORAIRAJ SPINTEX versus R CHITTIBABU & ORS

Where dismissals for misconduct are not connected with the industrial dispute pending in conciliation, Section 33(2)(b) applies and the employer may proceed subject to compliance with its conditions; in the facts of this case the misconduct (vandalism involving employer's property) was not connected with the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Sri Dorairaj Spintex; Respondent: R Chittibabu & Ors
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of the High Court (final Judgment of Supreme Court Disposing Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Section 33, Dismissal During Conciliation Proceedings, Prior Approval Under S.33(1)(b) Vs S.33(2)(b), Disciplinary Enquiry
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Labour Law Section 33 Dismissal During Conciliation Proceedings Prior Approval Under S.33(1)(b) Vs S.33(2)(b) Disciplinary Enquiry

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sri Dorairaj Spintex

Appellant

R Chittibabu & Ors

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of the High Court (final Judgment of Supreme Court Disposing Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether dismissals of workmen during pendency of conciliation proceedings required prior written permission under Section 33(1)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or could be carried out under Section 33(2)(b) when misconduct is not connected with the dispute
  2. 2 Whether the misconduct for which disciplinary proceedings were held was connected with the industrial disputes pending in conciliation

Ratio Decidendi

Where dismissals for misconduct are not connected with the industrial dispute pending in conciliation, Section 33(2)(b) applies and the employer may proceed subject to compliance with its conditions; in the facts of this case the misconduct (vandalism involving employer's property) was not connected with the conciliation demands, so the Assistant Commissioner and the High Court erred in holding s.33(1)(b) applied and the application under s.33(2)(b) is approved.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 14 March 2018 set aside
  • Application for approval filed by the appellant under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 stands approved