Supreme Court to hear plea saying labour code keeps charitable hospital and welfare body workers out of labour courts

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday consented to hear a petition submitted by the All India Trade Union Congress, Tamil Nadu, challenging the meaning of ‘market’ under the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, as unconstitutional.

The trade union has actually challenged arrangements under Section 2(p)(ii)(i), Section 2(p)(ii)(ii) and Section 2(p)(ii)(iv), which leave out organizations participated in charitable, social or humanitarian services, activities associated with sovereign functions, and other activities informed by the main federal government from the statutory meaning of market.

Check out: Supreme Court directs Sanjay Raut to appear in individual on November 17 in contempt case over remarks on CJI Surya Kant

The petition stated the exemptions would deny employees in facilities such as charitable medical facilities, universities and well-being organisations of the capability to challenge prohibited termination, retrenchment and unreasonable labour practices before labour courts and commercial tribunals. It argued the variation weakens the concepts of equality and non-arbitrariness under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, while infringing employees’ rights to income and access to justice under Article 21.

“The impugned exclusions raise serious constitutional concerns under Articles 14, 16, 19(1)(c) and 21 of the Constitution, as they arbitrarily deprive large classes of workers of statutory labour protections and create irrational distinctions between similarly situated workers. Workers employed in establishments such as charitable hospitals, welfare institutions and other public or service organisations would thereby be denied access to the statutory machinery for investigation and settlement of industrial disputes and rendered unable to challenge illegal termination, retrenchment or unfair labour practices before labour courts and industrial tribunals,” the trade body stated in its petition submitted through counsel Aarthi Rajan.

The petition pointed out an August judgment by a nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, which held that the identifying consider choosing whether a facility certifies as a market is the nature of its activities, instead of its institutional character, revenue intention or the identity of the company.

The court likewise clarified that where a facility carries out numerous functions, its dominant activity figures out whether it certifies as a market, the petition stated.

The August judgment held that its analysis of ‘market’ would not use to the Industrial Relations Code, 2020. The earlier meaning, which covered federal government departments, healthcare facilities, universities and well-being bodies, had actually been customized under the brand-new code. The judgment would use prospectively to pending disagreements under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

According to Rajan, the exemptions under the brand-new law leave from the concepts put down by the Constitution bench by leaving out whole classes of facilities based upon their institutional character instead of the nature of their activities.