33  Strikes and Lockouts

This chapter takes up the two best-known forms of industrial action — strikes (workers stop work) and lockouts (employers close the workplace). Both are statutorily defined, both are regulated by an interconnected set of conditions, and both carry serious legal and economic consequences when used outside the regulatory frame.

33.1 Strikes

33.1.1 Statutory Definition — Section 2(q)

The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines strike in Section 2(q):

“Strike means a cessation of work by a body of persons employed in any industry acting in combination, or a concerted refusal, or a refusal under a common understanding, of any number of persons who are or have been so employed, to continue to work or to accept employment.”

The IR Code, 2020 retains the substance of the definition with a notable extension: “and includes the concerted casual leave on a given day by fifty per cent or more workers employed in an industry” — an explicit response to the mass casual leave tactic that had been used to circumvent the strike-notice requirement.

33.1.2 Essential Elements

TipFour Essentials of a Strike
Element What it requires
Cessation or refusal of work Either stop working, refuse to continue, or refuse to accept employment
By a body of persons A group, not an individual
Acting in combination or common understanding Concerted action, not coincidence
Employed in an industry Within the meaning of the ID Act

A single worker stopping work is not a strike — it is absence; the combination element is constitutive.

33.1.3 Types of Strikes

TipCommon Types of Strikes
Type What workers do
General strike Workers across industries or units strike together — typically political
Token strike Short, symbolic stoppage — a few hours to one day — to register protest
Sympathetic strike Workers strike in support of another union or workforce
Wildcat strike Strike without prior notice and often without union sanction
Lightning strike Sudden strike with no warning
Stay-in / Sit-down strike Workers occupy the premises but do not work
Tool-down / Pen-down strike Stop work but remain at workstations
Slow-down (go-slow) Continue work at deliberately reduced pace
Work-to-rule Strict adherence to every rule, slowing output
Hunger strike Symbolic abstention from food, often by union leaders
Gherao Surrounding the manager so she cannot leave — distinctive Indian form
Bandh Mass shutdown across a region, often political
Mass casual leave Coordinated absence as informal strike — now expressly covered by §2(q) under IR Code

The legal status varies by type. Wildcat, gherao and bandh are routinely found illegal; token and general strikes are legal if they meet the notice and cooling-off requirements.

33.1.4 The Right to Strike — A Constitutional Note

The Supreme Court has held that the right to strike is not a fundamental right under the Constitution.

TipConstitutional Status of the Right to Strike
Source Position
Article 19(1)(c) Guarantees the right to form associations or unions, but not the right to strike
Article 19(4) Permits reasonable restrictions in the interest of sovereignty, integrity, public order or morality
AIBEA v. National Industrial Tribunal (1962) Right to strike is not part of Article 19(1)(c)
T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003) Government employees have no fundamental, statutory, moral or equitable right to strike
ID Act / IR Code Statutory protection for legal strikes; statutory penalties for illegal strikes

The right to strike is, therefore, a statutory right, regulated by the ID Act / IR Code, not a constitutional right.

33.1.6 Illegal Strikes — Section 24

A strike is illegal if it is commenced or continued in contravention of Section 22 or 23, or in contravention of an order issued under §10(3) referring the dispute to adjudication. The Code retains these prohibitions.

Consequences of an Illegal Strike

TipConsequences of an Illegal Strike
Consequence Provision
Penalty for participating workers Imprisonment up to one month or fine, or both — §26(1)
Penalty for instigating Imprisonment up to six months or fine, or both — §27
Loss of wages for the strike period “No work, no pay” — Bank of India v. T.S. Kelawala (1990)
Disciplinary action Subject to natural justice
Loss of immunity under Trade Unions Act §18 Civil immunity does not protect illegal acts

The Supreme Court has consistently held that participation in an illegal strike does not automatically justify dismissal — the principles of natural justice apply, and the punishment must be proportionate.

33.1.7 Sit-Down, Pen-Down and Tool-Down Strikes

These three forms involve workers being present at the workplace but not working. They are strikes within Section 2(q) — there is a cessation of work and a combination — and they are subject to the same notice and cooling-off requirements as conventional strikes.

33.1.8 Gherao — A Distinctive Indian Form

A gherao — surrounding a manager and physically preventing her from leaving — is not a recognised strike form. The Calcutta High Court in Jay Engineering Works v. State of West Bengal (1968) held that gherao is an act of wrongful confinement and amounts to a criminal offence. Workers participating in a gherao expose themselves to both disciplinary action and criminal prosecution.

33.2 Lockouts

33.2.1 Statutory Definition — Section 2(l)

The ID Act defines lockout in Section 2(l):

“Lockout means the temporary closing of a place of employment, or the suspension of work, or the refusal by an employer to continue to employ any number of persons employed by him.”

Three elements pin the definition: a temporary (not permanent) action, initiated by the employer (not the workers), in response to or in anticipation of an industrial dispute.

33.2.2 Strike vs Lockout

TipStrike vs Lockout
Dimension Strike Lockout
Initiator Workers Employer
Action Cessation of work Closing the workplace; refusal to employ
Counterpart legal regime §22, §23 — notice and cooling-off §22, §23 — same notice and cooling-off (mirror image)
Legal status Legal if notice / period requirements met Legal if notice / period requirements met
Penalty for illegal version §26(1) workers; §27 instigators §26(2) employer

The mirror-image structure is deliberate. The Act treats strike and lockout as the labour and capital sides of the same coin and applies symmetrical regulation.

33.2.3 Lockout vs Lay-off, Retrenchment, Closure

Indian labour law distinguishes four ways an employer can stop providing work to workers. The distinctions matter because the legal consequences and compensation are different in each.

TipLockout vs Lay-off vs Retrenchment vs Closure
Concept Definition / cause Status of employment Compensation
Lockout Temporary closure as a counter to an industrial dispute Continues; workers not employed for the period None statutorily; subject to settlement
Lay-off (§2(kkk)) Inability of the employer to give employment due to shortage of coal, power, raw material, accumulation of stocks, breakdown of machinery, natural calamity, etc. Continues 50% of basic wages and DA for the lay-off period — §25C
Retrenchment (§2(oo)) Termination of service of a worker by the employer for any reason whatsoever — other than punishment for misconduct, voluntary retirement, superannuation, illness or non-renewal of fixed-term contract Ends One month’s notice or pay in lieu, plus 15 days’ wages per completed year of service — §25F
Closure (§2(cc)) Permanent closing down of the place of employment or part of it Ends Notice to government plus retrenchment-style compensation — §25FFA, §25-O

Lockout is temporary and dispute-driven; lay-off and retrenchment are for cause (or no cause); closure is permanent.

33.2.5 Illegal Lockouts — Section 24

A lockout in contravention of §22 or §23 is illegal under §24. Penalties:

  • The employer is liable to imprisonment up to one month or fine, or both — §26(2).
  • Workers laid out are entitled to wages for the period of illegal lockout.

33.3 Lay-off, Retrenchment and Closure — Statutory Notes

Although these are not industrial action in the strike-lockout sense, they are commonly tested alongside.

33.3.1 Lay-off — Section 25C

TipLay-off Compensation under §25C
Provision Rule
Eligibility Workman with 1 year or more of continuous service
Compensation 50% of basic wages and DA for each day of lay-off
Maximum days 45 days in a year (after which retrenchment may be considered)
Exclusion Casual workers, badli workers (during the month of lay-off if a substitute is provided)

33.3.2 Retrenchment — Section 25F

For a worker with at least one year of continuous service, the employer must:

  • Give one month’s notice in writing or pay in lieu;
  • Pay compensation of 15 days’ average pay for every completed year of continuous service or part thereof in excess of six months;
  • Notify the appropriate government in the prescribed manner.

33.3.3 Section 25N — Prior Permission

For establishments employing 100 or more workers (300 or more under the IR Code), prior permission of the appropriate government is required for retrenchment, lay-off and closure. The threshold change in the IR Code is one of its most-discussed provisions — it gives more flexibility to employers in establishments with 100–299 workers.

33.3.4 Closure — Section 25-O

Closure of an establishment with the prescribed threshold of workers requires prior permission from the appropriate government, with at least 90 days’ notice stating the reasons. Workers are entitled to compensation as in retrenchment.

33.4 Essential Services Maintenance Act (ESMA)

The Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981 (and corresponding state ESMAs) is a separate regime. Where a strike threatens essential services — defined to include water, electricity, public health, defence production, banking, port operations, communication and many more — the central or state government may prohibit the strike for up to six months. Participation in a strike prohibited under ESMA is a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment.

ESMA is the strongest-ever statutory restriction on strikes in India and has been used in railways, banking, postal and government-employee strikes.

33.5 Famous Indian Strikes — Reference Points

TipNotable Indian Industrial Actions
Strike Year Significance
All-India Railway Strike (George Fernandes) 1974 20-day strike paralysed the railways; ended with mass arrests; became a turning point in IR-state relations
Bombay Textile Strike (Datta Samant) 1982–83 Largest industrial action in Indian history — over 250,000 workers, 18+ months; accelerated mill closures
Bank strikes recurrent Periodic national strikes by AIBEA and others on wage revisions
Bharat Bandh — multi-union national strikes recurrent Coordinated strikes by central federations on policy issues
Maruti Manesar 2012 Violent end to a long dispute; HR manager killed; large-scale dismissals
Hyundai Chennai 2012 Long dispute over union recognition
Tea-garden strikes (Assam, West Bengal) recurrent Wage and welfare disputes in plantations

33.7 Practice Questions

Eight questions to test the chapter. Each card hides the answer — click Show answer to reveal it.
Q1 Section 2(q) of the Industrial Disputes
Section 2(q) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines a strike as requiring all of the following except:
ACessation or refusal of work
BA body of persons employed in an industry
CActing in combination or under common understanding
DApproval of the appropriate government
Show answer
Correct answer
D. Government approval is not part of the §2(q) definition.
Q2 Match the type of strike with
Match the type of strike with its description:
Type Description
(i) Wildcat strike (a) Workers occupy the premises but do not work
(ii) Sit-down strike (b) Strike without prior notice and often without union sanction
(iii) Token strike (c) Strike of workers in sympathy with workers in another firm
(iv) Sympathetic strike (d) Short, symbolic stoppage to register protest
A(i)-(b), (ii)-(a), (iii)-(d), (iv)-(c)
B(i)-(a), (ii)-(b), (iii)-(c), (iv)-(d)
C(i)-(c), (ii)-(d), (iii)-(b), (iv)-(a)
D(i)-(d), (ii)-(c), (iii)-(a), (iv)-(b)
Show answer
Correct answer
A. (i)-(b), (ii)-(a), (iii)-(d), (iv)-(c)
Q3 In T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of
In T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003), the Supreme Court held that government employees have:
AA fundamental right to strike under Article 19(1)(c)
BNo fundamental, statutory, moral or equitable right to strike
CA statutory right to strike under the ID Act, 1947
DA right to strike on Sundays only
Show answer
Correct answer
B. The Court ruled against any general right to strike for government employees.
Q4 Under Section 22 of the ID
Under Section 22 of the ID Act, 1947, the strike notice in a public utility service must be given:
AAt least 7 days before the strike
BWithin 6 weeks before the strike, and not within 14 days of the notice
CAt least 90 days before the strike
DAfter the strike has begun
Show answer
Correct answer
B. Six weeks' window with a 14-day waiting period from the notice.
Q5 Which of the following is not
Which of the following is not a recognised distinction between a lockout and a closure?
ALockout is temporary; closure is permanent
BLockout is initiated in response to an industrial dispute; closure is for permanent shutdown
CIn a lockout employment continues; in a closure employment ends
DBoth produce the same statutory compensation
Show answer
Correct answer
D. Closure produces retrenchment-style compensation; lockout has no statutory compensation right.
Q6 Section 25F of the ID Act
Section 25F of the ID Act, 1947 requires which of the following before retrenchment of a worker with 1+ year of continuous service?
ANotice of one month or pay in lieu, plus 15 days' wages per completed year of service
BNotice of three months and 30 days' wages per year
CThree months' wages and a written warning
DNo notice required
Show answer
Correct answer
A. Section 25F prescribes one month's notice (or pay) plus 15-day-per-year compensation.
Q7 Under the Industrial Relations Code, 2020
Under the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, the strike-notice requirement of 14 days now applies to:
AOnly public-utility services
BAll industrial establishments
COnly government employees
DOnly manufacturing units
Show answer
Correct answer
B. The IR Code extends the 14-day notice to all industrial establishments.
Q8 Gherao — surrounding a manager and
Gherao — surrounding a manager and physically preventing her from leaving — was held to be:
AA protected form of strike under §2(q)
BAn act of wrongful confinement amounting to a criminal offence (Jay Engineering Works v. State of West Bengal, 1968)
CA legal lockout
DOutside the scope of labour law
Show answer
Correct answer
B. Calcutta High Court held gherao is wrongful confinement.
ImportantQuick recall
  • Strike — §2(q) ID Act, 1947 / IR Code, 2020. Four essentials: cessation, body of persons, combination / common understanding, employed in industry. IR Code adds: 50%+ concerted casual leave on a day = strike.
  • Strike types: general, token, sympathetic, wildcat, lightning, sit-down, pen-down, tool-down, slow-down, work-to-rule, hunger, gherao, bandh, mass casual leave.
  • Right to strike is statutory, not fundamental (AIBEA 1962; T.K. Rangarajan 2003).
  • Notice: public utility — §22 — 6 weeks’ window, 14 days’ wait; all establishments under IR Code §62 — 14 days’ notice.
  • §23 prohibitions: during conciliation pendency + 7 days after; during court/tribunal pendency + 2 months after; during arbitration pendency + 2 months after; while settlement / award is in operation.
  • §24 — illegal strikes; §26(1) penalty for workers; §27 for instigators; civil immunity (TU Act §18) lost.
  • Lockout — §2(l). Mirror-image regulation; §26(2) penalty for employer.
  • Lay-off — §2(kkk); compensation under §25C — 50% of basic + DA for up to 45 days/year.
  • Retrenchment — §2(oo); §25F — 1 month notice or pay + 15 days’ wages per year of service.
  • Closure — §2(cc); §25-O — prior permission and 90 days’ notice for prescribed-size establishments.
  • §25N: prior government permission for lay-off / retrenchment / closure — threshold raised from 100 to 300 workers under the IR Code, 2020.
  • ESMA, 1981: government may prohibit strikes in essential services.
  • Gherao held wrongful confinement — Jay Engineering Works v. State of West Bengal (1968).