Labour Court Dilemma: Can Employers Object to Workers Having Legal Representation?

Hi all,

One of our workmen has filed a case in the labour court. He is represented by an advocate. Can the employer object to this as the employee represented by management is not an advocate? The first hearing is yet to be held. Just received summons from the court. Does section 36 of the ID Act lay down any provisions on this? Can seniors guide?

Thank you.

Understanding Legal Representation in Labor Proceedings

See, it's simple. Follow this:

1) If a proceeding is before a Court of Inquiry and Conciliation Proceeding, no legal representative can be appointed.

2) Before a labor court, Industrial Tribunal, or National Tribunal, no legal representative can be appointed unless the other party agrees to such representation or the court itself allows such representation. This is under section 36(3)/(4), read along with the case law Co-op Stores Ltd v Industrial Tribunal.

However, in many cases, the court allows this. So, present the case carefully. Appreciate it if helpful.

There is no restriction for appointing a Legal Representative or Advocate in this matter.

Regards,
VEDA

Legal Representation in Labour Court Proceedings

If the proceeding is before a Court of Inquiry and Conciliation, no legal representative can be appointed. Before a labor court, Industrial Tribunal, or National Tribunal, no legal representative can be appointed unless the other party agrees to such representation or the court itself allows it. This is under section 36(3)/(4) read along with the case law Co-op Stores Ltd v Industrial Tribunal. However, in many cases, the court does allow this. Therefore, present the case carefully. Please refer to Indian Labour Laws & Shram Suvidha Simplified.

Appreciate if helpful. I agree with the above.

Regards, Madan Mohan

The Labour Laws support the workman to engage either a lawyer or legal representation on his behalf to appear before a Conciliation Officer or the Labour Court. Any counter statement on this matter by the management shall not be acceptable to the court of law. Therefore, the case should be challenged on its merits rather than testing the validity of the appearance of an advocate on the side of the workman.

Regards,