Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. In so far as the findings recorded by the Labour Court that at the relevant time, a collective dispute was pending under Section 2(k) of the I.D.Act, and it was obligatory on the part of the society to seek approval from the conciliation officer cannot be found fault with. This Court after going through the records found that there was a dispute pending which was actively pursued by the trade union. The management without obtaining an approval from the conciliation officer under Section 33(2)(b) of the I.D.Act and proceeding with their termination order will necessarily become void abinitio. The Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. v. Ram Gopal Sharma, reported in (2002) 2 SCC 244, at page 249 held as follows :