A

PROJECT REPORT

ON

“DUTIES AND POWERS OF CONCILIATION OFFICER”

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT

PRESCRIBED FOR

B.A. LLB (HONS.) SEMESTER-V

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Mr. Saurabh Mishra Name: Tanay Khandelwal

Assistant Professor Registration No. : 161401106

MANIPAL UNIVERSITY, JAIPUR

(Dehmi Kalan, Jaipur-Ajmer Highway, Jaipur-303007)

2018

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I hereby acknowledge the help and support of the teachers, who helped me in compiling this
project. I thank the faculty and management of Manipal University Jaipur, School of Law, as
the resources that were necessary to complete the project were provided by them.
I am highly indebted to my teacher “Mr. Saurabh Mishra” for his guidance and constant
supervision as well as for providing necessary knowledge regarding the subject at hand and
also for his support in completing the project.
I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents and friends for their kind
cooperation and encouragement which help me in completion of this project.

_______________
TANAY KHANDELWAL

2
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Tanay khandelwal, student of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) Semester V,
School of Law Manipal University, Jaipur has completed his LABOUR LAW project work
entitled “DUTIES AND POWERS OF CONCILIATON OFFICER” under my supervision
and guidance.
It is further certified that the candidate has made sincere efforts for the completion of this
project.

DATE: 15/09//2018
_______________
Mr. Saurabh Mishra

3
Contents
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 5
WHO IS CONCILIATON OFFICER? ................................................................................................... 5
DUTIES OF CONCILIATION OFFICERS ........................................................................................... 5
POWERS OF CONCILIATION OFFICER ........................................................................................... 8
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................. 10
WEBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................................... 10

4
 INTRODUCTION
Conciliation is a process by which discussion between the employers and the employees is
kept going through the participation of a conciliator. Conciliator plays a pivotal role in
bringing round the parties involved in the disputes and held in resolving difference by making
the parties understand and appreciate the difficulties of each party involved in the dispute in
the Industrial field. As a mediator, his tactful handling of the situation sometimes saves the
situation from taking a serious turn.

There are two authorities designed for the process of conciliation as follows:

i. Conciliation Officer (Section 4 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947)

ii. Board of Conciliation (Section 5 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947)

WHO IS CONCILIATON OFFICER?

According to Section 4 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the appropriate Government may
appoint one or more conciliation officers. A conciliation officer may be appointed for a
specified area or for specified industries in a specified area or for one or more specified
industries and either permanently or for a limited period. Under Section 21 of the Indian
Penal Code (IPC) a Conciliation officer shall be deemed to be a public servant. The
Conciliation officer is empowered to exercise all quasi-judicial powers of a Civil Court under
the Civil Procedure Code 1908. He is or has been a Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner
(Central) or Joint Commissioner of the State Labour Department, having a degree in law and
at least seven years' experience in the labour department including three years of experience
as Conciliation Officer.

DUTIES OF CONCILIATION OFFICERS

The duties of a Conciliation officer as laid down in section 12(1) are of two kinds, namely,
discretionary and mandatory. His duties are:

i. Where any industrial dispute exists or is apprehended in any industrial establishment

the conciliation officer may hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed manner.

5
 ii. Where the dispute related to a public utility service and a notice under section 22 has
been given, the conciliation officer shall hold conciliation proceeding in the
prescribed manner.

Thus in the former case the duty imposed on conciliation officer is only discretionary and that
too is dependent upon on or the other of the two exigencies, namely, the existence or
apprehension of the industrial dispute. In the latter case, on the satisfaction of the two
conditions(i.e., if dispute relates to a public utility service and a notice under section 22 has
been given), it shall be obligatory for him to hold conciliation proceedings.

What the conciliation officer shall do for the purpose of bringing about a settlement of the
dispute is stated in section 12(2). He shall without any delay investigate the dispute and all
matters affecting the merits and the right settlement of the dispute. He may also do all such
things as he thinks fit for the purpose of inducing the parties to come to a fair an amicable
settlement of the dispute. He shall try to find out the points of difference between the parties.
Ascertain the grounds on which respective claims are based and explore the possibilities to
settle the differences. He shall persuade the parties to avoid any conflict. Practically he has no
power to pass the independent order. He is not competent to adjudicate upon the disputes
between the management and the workmen. His authority is based on the response of the
parties to his move to bring them together and to bridge the gap existing between them. Both
parties are generally eager to end their differences because continuance of a dispute may
prove costly to both, the workmen and the employer. If the employer doesn’t submit to his
pursuation, the dispute may under section 12(3) be referred to board, court or tribunal.
Therefore, even the employer welcomes the intervention of the conciliation officer.

Section 12(3) provides that if a settlement of the dispute or of any of the matters in dispute is
arrived at in the course of the conciliation proceedings, the conciliation officer shall send a
report thereof. The report of the settlement shall be submitted to the appropriate government
or to an officer authorized in this behalf by the appropriate government. The report shall also
be accompanied with a memorandum of the settlement. The memorandum shall be signed by
the parties to the dispute.

6
In case no settlement is arrived at, the conciliation officer shall, as soon as practicable, after
the close of investigation, send the case to appropriate government. He shall send:

a. A full report setting forth the steps taken by him for ascertaining the facts and
circumstances resulting to the dispute and for bringing about the settlement of the
dispute; and
b. A full statement of such facts and circumstances and the reasons on account of which
in his opinion, a settlement could not be arrived at.

The report is sent for consideration of the case by the government. Therefore, if on
consideration of the report, the appropriate government is satisfied that there is a case for
reference to board, labour court, tribunal or national tribunal, it may make such
reference. Where the appropriate government doesn’t make a reference, it shall record
and communicate to the parties concerned the reasons for not making the reference. The
refusal of the government to refer the dispute for adjudication must be based on sound
considerations relevant to the facts of the case. If the appropriate government decides not
to make the reference and at the same time fails to record the reasons thereof, the court
can by issuing a writ direct the government to fulfil its obligation which such
government owes under the act.

In Transmission Corporation A.P. Ltd. And others v. P. Ramachandra Rao and

another1, respondents retired some three months before a revision of pay scales was
announced by the appellant corporation in pursuance to a settlement under section 12(3)
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The respondents sought benefits of the revision of
pay scales to be given in pension and other payments. The Supreme Court observed that
the revision of pay scale was based on a settlement arrived at under section 12(3) of the
Act. The settlement was the foundation of the Board’s decision was not challenged and
hence their claim is not sustainable.

Section 12(6) provides that the report shall be submitted within fourteen days of the
commencement of conciliation proceedings or within shorter period as maybe fixed by
the appropriate government. However the time for the submission of the report maybe

1
2006 II L.L.J. 824 (S.C.)

7
 extended by such period as maybe agreed upon in writing by all the parties of the
dispute. But any such extension in order to be valid must be approved by conciliation
officer. In other words, the extension of the time of submission of report is possible only
with the approval of the conciliation officer and agreement of the parties, which must be
in writing.

POWERS OF CONCILIATION OFFICER

The Fundamental basis for the exercise of powers by conciliation officer is the existence or
apprehension of an industrial dispute. Where neither an industrial dispute exists nor it is
apprehended the conciliation officer shall have no jurisdiction to the act. If an Industrial, and
not an individual dispute exists or is apprehended the conciliation officer shall have no
jurisdiction to act. If an industrial not an individual dispute exists or is apprehended, the
conciliation officer may investigate into the causes of such dispute with a view to bring
reconciliation between the parties. He doesn’t adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.
Therefore he need not serve any notice on the parties if he wishes to visit the premises of an
establishment to which the dispute refers.

The conciliation officer under section 12(1) has in one case option to hold conciliation
proceedings, while in others, on fulfilment of the two conditions mentioned in the latter part
of the subsection it shall be obligatory for him to hold conciliation proceedings. Where
conciliation officer receives any information about any existing or apprehended industrial
dispute which doesn’t relate to public utility service and he considers it necessary to intervene
in the dispute, he shall give formal intimation in writing to the parties concerned declaring his
intention to commence conciliation proceedings with effect from such date as maybe
specified therein.

In M/s. Juggat Pharma (P) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Madras 2 the
services of workmen who were employed in Madras as sales representatives were terminated.
The petitioner had its establishment in Bangalore and had no branch office in Madras. It was
held that the fact that the petitioner had no office at Madras doesn’t alter the fact that the
termination of the workmen’s services is connected with their employment in Madras. If a

2
(1982) II L.L.J. 71 Kant

8
cause of action could arise where the contract was concluded, a dispute could arise where the
contract of employment was terminated. Therefore, Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Madras
could initiate conciliation proceedings under section 12(1) of the act.

The effect of subsections (2) ,(3) and (4) is that all a conciliation officer can do is to induce
the parties to agree to a settlement or to report his failure to bring about a settlement and in
the absence of a settlement he has no authority under the law to pass any final order.

In Sundramoorthy M. and others v. Commissioner of Labour, Teynampet and

Another3, the petitioner workman had contended before the Labour Commissioner that the
resignations were forced but the commissioner decided against them holding that the dispute
could not be entertained on this ground that they were covered by the earlier settlement and
hence the present petition was filed. It was held by the High Court that the respondent
authorities had to determine whether any dispute existed between the parties. When the
authorities came to the conclusion that no industrial dispute existed between the parties by the
virtue of the said settlement, there was nothing wrong or illegal in their saying that there was
no dispute and in refusing to conciliate or file a failure report. Thus it is clear that the
conciliation officer can decide whether the dispute raised is inconsistent with any settlement
and if it so decides, such decision doesn’t tantamount to adjudication of dispute.

3
(2002) III L.L.J. 499 (Mad.)

9
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. S.N Mishra; Labour and Industrial Laws; Central Law Publications; 27th Edition;
2013

WEBLIOGRAPHY
1. https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/10/conciliation-conciliation-officer.html
2. https://lawnn.com/conciliation-conciliators-objects-duties-powers-disputes-cases/

10