Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Duties of conciliation officers.— (1) Where any industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, the conciliation officer may, or where the dispute relates to a public utility service and a notice under section 22 has been given, shall, hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed manner. (2) The conciliation officer shall, for the purpose of bringing about a settlement of the dispute, without delay, investigate the dispute and all The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 matters affecting the merits and right settlement thereof and may do all such things as he thinks fit for the purpose of inducing the parties to come to a fair and amicable settlement of the dispute. (3) If a settlement of the dispute or of any of the matters in dispute is arrived at in the course of the conciliation proceedings the conciliation officer shall send a report thereof to the appropriate Government 1[or an officer authorised in this behalf by the appropriate Government] together with a memorandum of the settlement signed by the parties to the dispute. (4) If no such settlement is arrived at, the conciliation officer shall, as soon as practicable after the close of the investigation, send to the appropriate Government a full report setting forth the steps taken by him for ascertaining the facts and circumstances relating to the dispute and for bringing about a settlement thereof, together with a full statement of such facts and circumstances, and the reasons on account of which, in his opinion, a settlement could not be arrived at. (5) If, on a consideration of the report referred to in sub-section (4), the appropriate Government is satisfied that there is a case for reference to a Board, 2[Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal], it may make such reference. Where the appropriate Government does not make such a reference it shall record and communicate to the parties concerned its reasons therefore. (6) A report under this section shall be submitted within fourteen days of the commencement of the conciliation proceedings or within such shorter period as may be fixed by the appropriate Government: 3[Provided that, 4[subject to the approval of the conciliation officer,] the time for the submission of the report may be extended by such period as may be agreed upon in writing by all the parties to the dispute.] Case Law Bound on all the parties The settlement arrived in the course of conciliation proceedings carries a presumption that it is just and fair. It becomes binding on all the parties to the dispute as 1 Ins. by Act 35 of 1965, Section 4 (w.e.f. 1.12.1965). 2 Subs. by Act 36 of 1956, Section 10, for “or Tribunal” (w.e.f. 10.3.1957). 3 Ins. by Act 36 of 1956, see. 10 (w.e.f. 17.9.1956). 4 Ins. by Act 36 of 1964, Section 8 (w.e.f. 19.12.1964). The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 well as to the other workmen in the establishment to which the dispute relates and all other persons who may be subsequently employed in that establishment. An individual employee cannot seek to wriggle out of it merely because it does not suit him; I.T.C. Ltd. Workers Welfare Association v. Management of I.T.C. Ltd., AIR 2002 SC 937. Just and fair settlement A settlement is a product of collective bargaining and is entitled to due weight and consideration more so when a settlement is arrived at in the course of conciliation proceeding. The settlement can only be ignored in exceptional circumstances viz., if it is demonstrably unjust, unfair or the result of mala fides such or corrupt motives on the part of those who were instrumental in effecting the settlement. Also the settlement has to be judged as a whole, taking an overall view and cannot be examined in piecemeal and in vacuum. Viewed in the light of these principles it cannot be said that the settlement which is otherwise valid and just suffers from any legal infirmity merely for the reason that one of the clauses in the settlement extends the benefit of life pension scheme only to the employees retiring after a particular date. Exclusion of workmen retiring before that date is no ground to characterise the settlement as unjust or unfair, more so when it was done with the consent of majority of workmen; I.T.C Ltd. Workers Welfare Association v. Management of I.T.C. Ltd., AIR 2002 SC 937. Obligation According to section 12(5) of the Act, the appropriate Government, while rejecting the request for reference of the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, is obliged to give reasons; Sukhbir Singh v. Union of India, 1994 LLR 375 (Del). Power of appropriate Government The appropriate Government acting under section 10 or section 12(5) of the Act has no power to decide the merits of the controversy. It can only determine whether dispute exists or not; Sukhbir Singh v. Union of India, 1994 LLR 375 (Del). Power of Court The tribunal while adjudicating the dispute and the High Court while exercising its jurisdictions under Articles 226/227 should be circumspect and cautious in disturbing the terms of settlement founded on collective bargaining and conciliation. It is not open to them to ignore the settlement or even belittle its effect by applying its mind independent of the settlement unless it is found to be contrary to the mandatory provisions of the Act; I.T.C. Ltd. Workers Welfare Association v. Management of I.T.C. Ltd., AIR 2002 SC 937. Object underlying conciliation, namely, to promote settlement of dispute, to be borne in mind for exercise of discretion by conciliation officer. So, exercise of said discretion on extraneous grounds not sustainable; Shridhar T. Shetty v. Speedy Transport Company (Pot.) Ltd., (2002) IV LLJ (Supp) Bom 930.