dismissal. retrenchment or termination of service of a workman, but concerns a lockout. It is only where the dispute relates to either discharge, dismissal, retrenchment ... raise, rest of the industrial disputes including disputes pertaining to illegal lockout, lay-off and lay-off compensation have to be filtered through the process
continue the manufacturing operation and hence, it issued a notice of lockout on 3-10-1996, under section ... declared its intention to commence the lockout from the beginning of the 1st shift on 20-6-1996, for the reasons stated in the annexure
according to the respondents it had effected a valid and legal lockout from 15-12-1986 onwards, and therefore, the petitioner was not entitled ... wages for the period of the legal and valid lockout. It was specifically contended that the attendance of the employees was dispensed with from
dated March 29, 1999 (Annexure P-9), the petitioner declared the "Lockout". In the notice, it was mentioned that the "lockout ... Disputes Act, 1947. According to the respondent No. 4, the declaration of lockout in the notice (Annexure P-9) without specifying the period for which
illegal and directing payment of wages for the periods of lockout declared as illegal by the Industrial Tribunal.
2. Common questions arising, these two writ ... Vidyasagar, learned Counsel for workmen.
Writ Petition No.3192 of 1994
Lockout was declared in the Complex from
factory were suspended with effect from 7th November, 1987 followed by a lockout which commenced from 23rd November, 1987. The office and supervisory staff ... well as the managerial staff were reportedly exempted from this lockout.
3. The respondent was one of the employees covered by the lockout
dated 11.3.1998 issued by Secretary (Labour), Delhi Administration prohibiting the continuance of lockout in respect of the concerned workmen at 3434, Nicholson Road, Kashmere Gate ... case of the petitioner-Company that subsequent to the lockout at Bombay Unit, the work activities were severely affected in the Delhi Unit
assumption that the conduct of the appellant amounts to a lockout, and this argument is somewhat strengthened by the ill-advised and unfortunate order passed ... action of the appellant which followed the said strike is either a lockout or amounts to a closure. The respondents will contend that
managerial personnel. The workers in their complaint have alleged that the lockout is nothing but an attempt to close the unit and this is supported ... were merely empty promises and were only a device to continue the lockout. The lock-out was declared on February 5, 1998. Nearly 20 months
said Act the learned counsel has further submitted that partial lockout announced by the petitioner is illegal, as it has been made pending conciliation proceedings ... August 13, 1999, on certain demands. The petitioner also has announced partial lockout with effect from August 13, 1999. Though argument was made about
