Case Comment: Critical Analysis Of Lenin Kumar Ray V. M/S Express Publications (Madurai) Ltd., 2024 INSC 802
- IJLLR Journal
- 3 minutes ago
- 2 min read
Yuvaraj. G, Advocate, LL.M (Labour Law and Administrative Law), School of Excellence in Law, The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai
ABSTRACT
The definition of the “Workman” under Section 2(s) of The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as “Act”), inter alia places embargo on the application of the Act to the Industrial Disputes on the context of the wages of the Workman which is limited to Rs 10,000/- and is probably less than the Minimum Wages determined by the various states in India under The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 which renders the whole Act nugatory and defeating the object of the Act which was not foreseen by the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Lenin Kumar Ray v. M/s. Express Publications (Madurai) Ltd., The Court was tied by the words of legislation even though the Justice system had been bestowed the power for doing complete justice under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The definition of Workman under Section 2(s) of the Act imparts unreasonable classification of the workman into supervisory, Managerial or Administrative based on the nature of work assigned to him by the employee which is in toto irrelevant to the Jurisprudence of Labour. The decision of the Court is appreciable to be in the corners of law, maintaining Judicial Discipline abiding the theory of separation of powers but the Rule of Law being basic tenet of the Constitution, had been defeated on the context of “Lawlessness” rendering the labour to lurch in the hands of the Legislature and Employer, where the Temple of Justice had done the Justice but hadn't placed due diligence in Justice seems to be done.
Keywords: Workman, wages, Industrial Dispute, managerial, administrative capacity, supervisory.
