affidavit is that, on 31.01.2014
itself (Ex.P10), they declared a lockout and shut down the factory. They did not
explain that ... follow the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act prior to
declaring the lockout.
14. The Labour Court held that the enquiry conducted against the respondents
under
second head are;
(a) with respect to the legality of the lockout
declared on 21.08.1994;
(b) alleged willful abstinence from work by the
workmen ... after the petitioner-Establishment lifted the
lockout with effect from 13.12.1994, and
(c) wages payable for the period from 20.08.1994 to
13.12.1994 and upto
factory at Tadepalli was transferred to Kistna Cements
Limited.
3. A lockout was declared by the 3rd respondent on 29.05.1993.
The Government of Andhra Pradesh ... issued GORt.No.1178,
dated 25.06.1993, prohibiting the continuance of lockout and
referred the matters for adjudication to the Labour Court - Cum -
Industrial Tribunal
preventing the company from doing any activity. Therefore, the
petitioner company issued lockout notice on 07.09.2009 and the company was
locked out on 17.09.2009 after ... following rules and guidelines enumerated under
the labour laws. Against the said lockout, the workman preferred a dispute in
ID.No.11 of 2010 raising
Labour Court has declared the said lockout as illegal and unjustified and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/06/2025 ... directed the management to lift the lockout within a period of three months
from the date of the award and provide employment to the workmen
Chittivalasa Jute Mill Lockout Badhita ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 30 January, 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE
Chittivalasa Jute Mill Lockout Badhita ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 February, 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE
Respondents since the
appellant’s factory was closed due to
lockout on 05.01.2008 the said notice
was affixed on the main door of the
factory ... days from the date of its
receipts. The company was
under lockout, hence the
notice issued U/s 10(5) of
the Act was affixed
workmen to receive just and reasonable work benefits, though equally,
declaration of lockout by the management also stands negatived.
5. It is the further averment ... Component
Manufacturers Association of India, Chennai.
ii) Whether the Industry is strike/lockout prone?
There was no strike in the applicant company during
cited stemmed from a case involving a
demand for wages during the lockout period. In that context, the Supreme
Court addressed the justification ... lockout, noting that in such cases,
workmen may not be entitled to wages if the lockout occurred after a
strike by the workers. In contrast
