The Industrial Tribunal and the National Industrial Tribunal

Some words this chapter uses

Tribunal, defined in section 2(zn), means an Industrial Tribunal constituted under section 44.

National Industrial Tribunal, defined in section 2(y), is the tribunal constituted under section 46.

Bench is the member or members actually hearing a case, as distinct from the Tribunal as an institution.

Judicial Member and Administrative Member are the two kinds of member every Tribunal has under section 44(2).

Consensus, in section 47(1), means agreement of the members. The Code provides its own machinery in section 47(2) and (3) for the case where it is absent.

De novo means afresh, from the beginning. Section 51(2) allows a transferred case to be heard either de novo or from the stage it had reached.

Section 44: the Industrial Tribunal

44(1): who constitutes it, and one extra jurisdiction

The appropriate Government may, by notification, constitute one or more Industrial Tribunals for the adjudication of industrial disputes and for performing such other functions as may be assigned under the Code. A Tribunal constituted by the Central Government also exercises the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on the Tribunal as defined in section 2(m) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952.

That last clause is easy to skim and worth noticing. A Central Tribunal under this Code is also the appellate body under the provident funds legislation, so one forum now does both jobs.

44(2) and (3): the composition

Every Industrial Tribunal shall consist of two members appointed by the appropriate Government, of whom one shall be a Judicial Member and the other an Administrative Member.

A bench shall consist of a Judicial Member and an Administrative Member, or a single Judicial Member, or a single Administrative Member.

So the institution always has two members; the bench may have one or two. Which it is depends on section 44(7).

44(7): which cases need both members

The procedure of the Tribunal, including the distribution of cases between benches, is as prescribed, provided that a bench consisting of a Judicial Member and an Administrative Member shall entertain and decide the cases only relating to:

• (a) the application and interpretation of standing orders;
• (b) discharge or dismissal of workmen, including reinstatement of, or grant of relief to, workmen dismissed;
• (c) the illegality or otherwise of a strike or lock-out;
• (d) retrenchment of workmen and closure of establishment; and
• (e) Trade Union disputes,

and the remaining cases shall be entertained and decided by a bench consisting either of a Judicial Member or of an Administrative Member.

Look at what those five have in common and the design becomes clear. Every one of them is a case in which a person or an organisation stands to lose something: a job, a union's registration, the legality of industrial action, an establishment. They are the cases where the stakes are highest and where a decision by one person would be least acceptable to the losing side. Everything else, which is broadly the economic and collective work, goes to a single member.

Note also that (a) and (e) connect this section back to two earlier chapters. The application and interpretation of standing orders is section 37, worked in [Certifying, Appealing and Modifying Standing Orders]; and Trade Union disputes are section 22, worked in [Disputes, Change of Name, Amalgamation and Dissolution]. Both send their work here, and both therefore get a two-member bench.

44(4) to (6): appointment and tenure

For a Tribunal constituted by the Central Government, the qualifications, method of recruitment, term of office, salaries and allowances, resignation, removal and other conditions of service of both members are in accordance with the rules made under section 184 of the Finance Act 2017. A proviso provides that a person who has held a post below the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India, or an equivalent rank in the Central or a State Government, shall not be eligible to be appointed as an Administrative Member.

For a Tribunal constituted by a State Government, those matters are as prescribed by the State Government, section 44(5).

And by section 44(6), the salary, allowances and conditions of service of a member appointed by a State Government shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment.

Sub-section (6) is a guarantee of independence and is the kind of provision that ordinarily protects judges. A member whose pay could be cut after he decided a case against the Government that appointed him would not be independent of it.

44(8) to (10): presiding, vacancies and staff

44(8): where the bench consists of one member of each kind, the Judicial Member shall preside.

44(9): a vacancy, other than a temporary absence, is filled in the prescribed manner, and the proceeding continues from the stage at which the vacancy is filled. So a case does not restart because a member left.

44(10): the appropriate Government provides officers and staff in consultation with the Judicial Member.

Section 45: the constitution cannot be questioned

No notification appointing a person as a Judicial Member or an Administrative Member shall be called in question in any manner; and no act or proceeding before the Tribunal shall be called in question in any manner on the ground mainly of the existence of any vacancy in, or defect in the constitution of, such Tribunal.

This is a validating provision of a familiar kind, and its purpose is practical. Without it, a party who lost before a Tribunal could reopen everything by showing that one member had been irregularly appointed or that a seat had been vacant. Note the word "mainly" in the second limb: the protection is against a challenge founded mainly on a vacancy or a defect in constitution, not a general immunity from judicial review.

Section 48: who may not sit

No person shall be appointed to, or continue in, the office of a member of a Tribunal or National Industrial Tribunal if:

• (a) he is not an independent person; or
• (b) he has attained the age of sixty-five years.

An Explanation defines "independent person" for this section as a person who is unconnected with the industrial dispute referred to the Tribunal or National Industrial Tribunal, or with any industry directly affected by such dispute.

Three features are examinable.

The bar operates twice over. The words are "appointed to, or continue in", so a member who becomes disqualified after appointment must go; independence is not tested once at the door.

The definition of independence is functional, not general. It does not ask whether the person is independent in the abstract. It asks whether he is unconnected with this dispute, or with any industry directly affected by it. A distinguished person with a shareholding in the industry before the Tribunal is not independent for that case.

Sixty-five is an absolute ceiling on continuance, and it applies to the Judicial and the Administrative Member alike.

Read section 48 with section 45 and the balance appears. Section 45 protects the Tribunal's decisions from being reopened on the ground mainly of a defect in its constitution; section 48 is the substantive guarantee that the people constituting it are independent and within the age limit. The first prevents technical challenges; the second supplies the thing that makes the forum worth protecting.

Section 47: how a two-member Tribunal decides

47(1): the decision shall be by consensus of the members.

47(2): if the members differ in opinion on any point, they shall state the point or points on which they differ and make a reference to the appropriate Government.

47(3): on receiving that reference the appropriate Government shall appoint a Judicial Member of another Tribunal or of a National Industrial Tribunal, who shall hear the point or points himself, and those points shall be decided according to the majority of the members who first heard the case, including the Judicial Member of the other Tribunal who heard the case thereafter.

Work the arithmetic, because that is what makes the provision intelligible. Two members disagree, so there is no majority. A third judicial mind is brought in from outside, hears only the disputed points, and then the decision is by the majority of three: the original two plus the newcomer. Whichever of the original two the newcomer agrees with carries the point.

Two features are worth remarking. The third person is always a Judicial Member, so a deadlock is broken by a legal mind. And he hears only the points of difference, not the whole case, which keeps the delay proportionate.

Section 46: the National Industrial Tribunal

46(1): the Central Government may, by notification, constitute one or more National Industrial Tribunals for the adjudication of industrial disputes which, in the opinion of the Central Government, involve questions of national importance or are of such a nature that industrial establishments situated in more than one State are likely to be interested in, or affected by, such disputes.

46(2): it consists of two members appointed by the Central Government, one a Judicial Member and the other an Administrative Member.

46(3): a person is not qualified as Judicial Member unless he is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court.

46(4): a person is not qualified as Administrative Member unless he is or has been Secretary to the Government of India, or holds an equivalent rank in the Central or a State Government, having adequate experience of handling labour related matters.

46(5): the Judicial Member shall preside.

Compare the qualifications with section 44 and the hierarchy is visible. For a National Industrial Tribunal the Judicial Member must be or have been a High Court Judge, and the Administrative Member must be or have been a Secretary to the Government of India with adequate labour experience. Section 44's Tribunal has no such floor for its Judicial Member in the section itself, and its Administrative Member need only be of or above the rank of Joint Secretary.

Section 54: how a dispute gets there. The Central Government may refer an industrial dispute to a National Industrial Tribunal which in its opinion involves a question of national importance or is of such a nature that establishments in more than one State are likely to be interested in or affected by it. Where a dispute has been so referred, or transferred under section 92, the National Industrial Tribunal shall hold its proceedings expeditiously and shall submit its award to the Central Government within the period specified in the order referring or transferring it, or any further period the Central Government extends.

Note the asymmetry, and it is examinable. An ordinary Tribunal is reached by a party's application under section 53(6), with no Government involvement. A National Industrial Tribunal is reached by a Central Government reference under section 54, or by transfer. The reference requirement that the Code abolished for ordinary adjudication survives at the national level, which makes sense: the question whether a dispute is of national importance is one only the Central Government is placed to answer.

Sections 51 and 52: the transition

These two sections, with section 104(1A), are the answer to the question every pending case raised on 21 November 2025, and they are asked together.

Section 51(1): on and from the commencement of the Code, cases pending immediately before it:

• (a) in the Labour Court and the Tribunal constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, are transferred to the Tribunal having corresponding jurisdiction under the Code;
• (b) in the National Tribunal under that Act, are transferred to the National Industrial Tribunal having corresponding jurisdiction.

Section 51(2): the transferred cases shall be dealt with de novo or from the stage at which they were pending before the transfer, as it may deem fit. So the new Tribunal chooses, and a part-heard case need not start again.

Section 52: a presiding officer of a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal constituted under the 1947 Act, holding office immediately before the commencement of the Code and qualified to be appointed under this Code, shall be the Judicial Member of the Tribunal or National Industrial Tribunal, and shall continue as such for the remaining period of his office.

Read those two with section 104(1A), worked in [The Code, and the Day the Law Changed]. That sub-section, inserted by Act 1 of 2026 with effect from 21 November 2025, provides that the Tribunals and statutory authorities functioning under the repealed Acts shall continue to function until the corresponding bodies under the Code become functional. Together the three provisions mean: the old forums keep working until the new ones exist; when a new Tribunal exists, the pending cases move to it; and the old presiding officers become its Judicial Members. Nothing lapses and nobody is left without a forum.

The old scheme and the new, compared

A worked example

The facts. At the Wada packaging plant, conciliation has failed and the union has received the failure report. Four separate matters remain.

One: whether the dismissal of Meera was justified. The union applies to the Tribunal under section 53(6). Under section 44(7)(b) this is a case relating to the discharge or dismissal of workmen including reinstatement, so it must be entertained and decided by a bench of a Judicial Member and an Administrative Member, and by section 44(8) the Judicial Member presides.

Two: whether the strike called in June was illegal. Section 44(7)(c): illegality or otherwise of a strike or lock-out, so again a two-member bench.

Three: a demand for a revision of the wage structure. This is not in the section 44(7) list, so under the closing words of that sub-section it is entertained and decided by a bench consisting either of a Judicial Member or of an Administrative Member, sitting alone.

Four: a quarrel between two unions about which of them represents the workers. That is a Trade Union dispute, and it reaches the Tribunal by an application under section 22(1)(a) rather than under section 53(6). By section 44(7)(e) it goes to a two-member bench, and by section 22(2) no civil court may entertain it.

Now the deadlock. On matter one, the Judicial Member would reinstate Meera and the Administrative Member would not. There is no consensus, so section 47(1) is not satisfied. Under section 47(2) the two members state the point on which they differ and refer it to the appropriate Government. Under section 47(3) that Government appoints a Judicial Member of another Tribunal, who hears that point and no more, and the point is decided by the majority of the three: the two who first heard the case and the newcomer.

A procedural objection. The employer discovers that the Administrative Member's appointment notification was irregular and argues that everything is void. Section 45 answers him: no notification appointing a member shall be called in question in any manner, and no act or proceeding before the Tribunal shall be called in question on the ground mainly of the existence of any vacancy in, or defect in the constitution of, the Tribunal.

A transition point. The dismissal case had actually been filed before a Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 in October 2025 and was part-heard when the Code commenced. Under section 51(1)(a) it stands transferred to the Tribunal having corresponding jurisdiction, and under section 51(2) that Tribunal may deal with it de novo or from the stage at which it was pending, as it thinks fit. Meanwhile, under section 104(1A), the Labour Court itself continued to function until the Code's Tribunal became functional. And the officer who had been presiding over that Labour Court, if qualified under the Code, is the Judicial Member of the new Tribunal under section 52, and continues for the remaining period of his office.

Finally, a national dispute. Suppose the wage demand is one of a set raised at plants in four States, and the Central Government forms the opinion that establishments in more than one State are likely to be affected. Under section 54(1) it may refer the dispute to a National Industrial Tribunal, whose Judicial Member must be or have been a High Court Judge and whose Administrative Member must be or have been a Secretary to the Government of India with adequate labour experience. That Tribunal must proceed expeditiously and submit its award within the period specified in the referring order or as extended.

What this does NOT mean

It does not mean there is still a Labour Court. The Code has one Industrial Tribunal. The Labour Court and the Tribunal of the repealed Act are gone, and their pending cases were transferred by section 51.

It does not mean every case is heard by two members. Only the five classes in section 44(7). The rest are decided by a single Judicial Member or a single Administrative Member sitting alone.

It does not mean the Administrative Member is a junior figure. He is one of the two members of the Tribunal, and for a Central Tribunal he may not be a person who held a post below the rank of Joint Secretary; for a National Industrial Tribunal he must be or have been a Secretary to the Government of India with adequate labour experience.

It does not mean a Government reference is needed for an ordinary dispute. Section 53(6) lets a party apply. The reference survives only for the National Industrial Tribunal, under section 54.

It does not mean a deadlock defeats the case. Section 47(2) and (3) supply a third judicial mind and a majority of three.

It does not mean section 45 excludes judicial review altogether. It bars a challenge founded mainly on a vacancy in, or a defect in the constitution of, the Tribunal.

Limits, criticism and amendments

The two-member Tribunal is the Code's most-discussed structural reform and the arguments run both ways. In its favour: economic questions are decided by somebody with administrative experience, and the artificial split between two schedules is gone. Against it: an Administrative Member is by definition drawn from the senior civil service, and in a dispute where the Government or a public undertaking is the employer, that raises a question about the appearance of independence that section 44(6)'s protection of conditions of service does not fully answer.

Section 47's deadlock machinery routes the disagreement through the appropriate Government, which must appoint the third member. In a dispute to which that Government is a party, the party chooses who breaks the tie.

The qualifications of the Judicial Member of an ordinary Tribunal are not stated in section 44 but left to rules under section 184 of the Finance Act 2017 for Central Tribunals and to State rules for State ones, so the Code itself sets no judicial floor at that level, unlike section 46(3) for the National Industrial Tribunal.

And section 45's validating provision, though standard, is wide. A notification appointing a member may not be called in question in any manner.

Against all that, the removal of the reference requirement by section 53(6), the transfer machinery in section 51, the continuity of the old presiding officers in section 52 and the continuity of the old forums in section 104(1A) together make a far tidier transition than the repeal of a seventy-eight-year-old Act might have produced.

Quick revision

• Section 44(1): the appropriate Government constitutes one or more Industrial Tribunals by notification; a Central one also has the EPF Act Tribunal's jurisdiction.
• 44(2), (3): two members, one Judicial and one Administrative; a bench is both, or a single Judicial Member, or a single Administrative Member.
• 44(7): the two-member bench decides only (a) application and interpretation of standing orders; (b) discharge or dismissal, including reinstatement or relief; (c) illegality or otherwise of a strike or lock-out; (d) retrenchment and closure; (e) Trade Union disputes. All other cases go to a single member.
• 44(4): Central Tribunal service conditions under section 184 of the Finance Act 2017; an Administrative Member may not have held a post below Joint Secretary. 44(6): conditions of a State-appointed member not to be varied to his disadvantage. 44(8): the Judicial Member presides on a mixed bench. 44(9): a proceeding continues from the stage at which a vacancy is filled.
• Section 45: no appointment notification may be called in question in any manner, and no proceeding may be challenged mainly on a vacancy or defect in constitution.
• Section 47: decision by consensus; on difference, state the points and refer to the appropriate Government, which appoints a Judicial Member of another Tribunal to hear those points, decided by the majority of the three.
• Section 46: the Central Government constitutes National Industrial Tribunals for disputes involving questions of national importance or affecting establishments in more than one State; Judicial Member must be or have been a High Court Judge, Administrative Member a Secretary to the Government of India with adequate labour experience; the Judicial Member presides. Section 54: reached by Central Government reference, proceedings expeditious, award within the specified or extended period.
• Sections 51, 52 and 104(1A): pending Labour Court and Tribunal cases transfer, to be heard de novo or from the stage reached; old presiding officers become Judicial Members for the remainder of their term; and the old forums keep functioning until the new ones do.

Test yourself

1. Describe the composition and benches of an Industrial Tribunal. Under section 44(1) the appropriate Government may by notification constitute one or more Industrial Tribunals for the adjudication of industrial disputes. Under section 44(2) every Tribunal consists of two members appointed by the appropriate Government, one a Judicial Member and the other an Administrative Member. Under section 44(3) a bench may consist of a Judicial Member and an Administrative Member together, or of a single Judicial Member, or of a single Administrative Member; and by section 44(8) the Judicial Member presides where the bench is composed of one of each.

2. Which cases must be decided by a two-member bench? By the proviso to section 44(7), only cases relating to the application and interpretation of standing orders; the discharge or dismissal of workmen, including reinstatement of or grant of relief to workmen dismissed; the illegality or otherwise of a strike or lock-out; the retrenchment of workmen and closure of establishment; and Trade Union disputes. All remaining cases are entertained and decided by a bench consisting either of a Judicial Member or of an Administrative Member.

3. The two members of a Tribunal disagree. What happens? Section 47(1) requires the decision to be by consensus. Under section 47(2), if the members differ in opinion on any point they shall state the point or points on which they differ and make a reference to the appropriate Government. Under section 47(3) that Government shall appoint a Judicial Member of another Tribunal or of a National Industrial Tribunal, who shall hear those points himself, and the points shall be decided according to the majority of the members who first heard the case, including the Judicial Member who heard them thereafter, so the outcome is a majority of three.

4. Distinguish the Industrial Tribunal from the National Industrial Tribunal. An Industrial Tribunal is constituted by the appropriate Government under section 44 for the adjudication of industrial disputes generally, and is reached by a party's own application under section 53(6). A National Industrial Tribunal is constituted by the Central Government under section 46 for disputes which in its opinion involve questions of national importance or are of such a nature that industrial establishments in more than one State are likely to be interested in or affected by them, and is reached by a Central Government reference under section 54 or by transfer under section 92. Both have two members, but the qualifications differ: for a National Industrial Tribunal the Judicial Member must be or have been a Judge of a High Court and the Administrative Member must be or have been Secretary to the Government of India or of equivalent rank with adequate experience of labour matters.

5. What happened to cases pending before Labour Courts when the Code commenced? Under section 51(1)(a) cases pending immediately before the commencement in a Labour Court or Tribunal constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 stand transferred to the Tribunal having corresponding jurisdiction under the Code, and under section 51(1)(b) cases pending before the National Tribunal stand transferred to the National Industrial Tribunal. Under section 51(2) the transferred cases are dealt with de novo or from the stage at which they were pending, as the Tribunal deems fit. Section 52 provides that a presiding officer of such a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal holding office immediately before commencement, and qualified under the Code, shall be the Judicial Member and shall continue for the remaining period of his office. And section 104(1A), inserted by Act 1 of 2026 with effect from 21 November 2025, keeps the old Tribunals and authorities functioning until the corresponding bodies under the Code become functional.

6. Comment on the replacement of the Labour Court and Tribunal by a single two-member Tribunal. Under the repealed Act a Labour Court dealt with the matters in its Second Schedule, broadly individual and disciplinary questions, and an Industrial Tribunal with those in its Third Schedule, broadly collective and economic questions, each under a single judicial presiding officer. Disputes did not respect that division, so the same quarrel could straddle both, and a judge decided economic questions on which he had no special competence. The Code merges the two into one Tribunal of a Judicial and an Administrative Member, reserving to the two of them together the five classes of case in section 44(7), where the stakes are highest, and leaving the rest to a single member so that the forum is not slowed to the pace of its heaviest work. The criticism is that the Administrative Member is drawn from the senior civil service, which raises a question about the appearance of independence where the Government or a public undertaking is the employer, and that section 47(3) routes any deadlock through the very Government that may be a party; section 44(6)'s guarantee that conditions of service shall not be varied to a member's disadvantage answers that only in part.