India 2026: Navigating Section 72 Industrial Dispute Resolution

In India, Section 72 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (expected to be fully in force by 2026) offers a streamlined framework for resolving industrial disputes, aiming to foster industrial peace and productivity. This article details the mechanisms and implications for businesses and startups navigating industrial relations in 2026.

Understanding Section 72 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (IRC)

The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (IRC), is a significant piece of legislation in India, consolidating and amending laws relating to trade unions, conditions of employment in industrial establishments, and the investigation and settlement of industrial disputes. While the Code received presidential assent in September 2020, its full implementation, including specific rules and effective dates for all sections, is an ongoing process, with significant operational clarity expected by 2026. Section 72 of the IRC specifically deals with the power of the appropriate government to refer industrial disputes for adjudication. This section grants the Central or State Government the authority to refer disputes to a Labour Court or an Industrial Tribunal for resolution, where conciliation proceedings have failed or are deemed unlikely to succeed. This power is crucial for ensuring that unresolved disputes, which could otherwise escalate into industrial unrest, are brought before a judicial body for a binding decision. Unlike the previous Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the IRC aims to introduce greater flexibility and efficiency, including provisions for fixed-term employment and changes to the threshold for requiring government permission for retrenchment or closure. For startups and businesses, understanding Section 72 means recognizing the government’s ultimate role in compelling dispute resolution, even when direct negotiations or conciliation attempts falter. The Code also emphasizes conciliation as a primary mechanism, with Section 53 mandating conciliation officers to endeavor to bring about a settlement of the dispute. Only upon the failure of such efforts does the government’s power under Section 72 truly come into play, providing a safety net for disputes that remain intractable. This structured approach aims to minimize the impact of disputes on business operations and employee welfare, promoting a stable industrial environment essential for economic growth. The IRC also introduces the concept of a ‘negotiating union’ or ‘negotiating council’ under Section 14, aiming to streamline collective bargaining and potentially reduce the number of disputes that reach the stage of government referral. However, even with these proactive measures, Section 72 remains a critical component for final adjudication. The government’s decision to refer a dispute is typically based on a review of the conciliation officer’s report and an assessment of whether an industrial dispute exists and is fit for adjudication. This discretionary power is exercised judiciously, considering the public interest and the need to maintain industrial peace. Therefore, businesses must maintain accurate records of their industrial relations, including any attempts at internal resolution or conciliation, as these records will be pivotal if a dispute is referred under Section 72.

Key takeaway: Section 72 of the IRC empowers the government to refer unresolved industrial disputes to Labour Courts or Industrial Tribunals, emphasizing adjudication after conciliation efforts fail.

The Conciliation Process: A Prerequisite to Section 72 Referral

Before an industrial dispute can be referred for adjudication under Section 72 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, the conciliation process typically serves as a mandatory precursor. This fundamental step is designed to facilitate an amicable settlement between the parties involved – usually the employer and the workmen (or their union) – without the need for formal adjudication. Sections 53 to 60 of the IRC outline the conciliation mechanism. Upon receipt of a notice of industrial dispute, the appropriate government appoints a Conciliation Officer who is mandated to hold conciliation proceedings. These proceedings are expected to be completed within a prescribed timeframe, usually 45 days from the date of reference, as per Section 56(1) of the IRC. The Conciliation Officer acts as a mediator, endeavoring to bring about a fair and amicable settlement of the dispute. They are empowered to investigate the dispute and all matters affecting the merits and the right settlement thereof, to do all such things as they think fit for the purpose of inducing the parties to come to a fair and amicable settlement. For startups, engaging proactively and transparently in conciliation is not just a legal obligation but a strategic move. A successful conciliation avoids the costs, delays, and adversarial nature of tribunal proceedings. If a settlement is reached, it is recorded in a Memorandum of Settlement signed by the parties and the Conciliation Officer, which is legally binding on all parties to the dispute, as per Section 60 of the IRC. This binding nature means the terms of the settlement must be adhered to, and any breach can lead to legal consequences, including penalties under Section 106 for non-compliance with settlements, which can include imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both. In cases where conciliation fails, the Conciliation Officer submits a report to the appropriate government detailing the steps taken and the reasons for the failure, as per Section 58 of the IRC. This ‘failure report’ is critical because it forms the basis for the government’s decision on whether to refer the dispute for adjudication under Section 72. The report must clearly indicate whether an industrial dispute exists and whether it is fit for reference. Businesses should meticulously document their participation in conciliation, including offers made, counter-offers received, and any reasons for disagreement, as this documentation can influence the government’s decision and subsequent tribunal proceedings. A proactive and good-faith approach during conciliation can demonstrate a commitment to resolution, potentially influencing the government to assess the dispute more favorably or even to decline a referral if the employer’s position is deemed reasonable and attempts at resolution were genuine. Therefore, conciliation is not merely a procedural hurdle but a substantive opportunity for dispute resolution, demanding careful legal and strategic consideration.

Key takeaway: Conciliation is a mandatory, time-bound process under the IRC, aiming for amicable settlement, and its failure report is crucial for a Section 72 referral.

Adjudication under Section 72: Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals

When conciliation efforts fail, and the appropriate government decides to refer a dispute under Section 72 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, the matter is escalated to either a Labour Court or an Industrial Tribunal for adjudication. The choice between a Labour Court and an Industrial Tribunal depends on the nature of the dispute, as specified in the Second and Third Schedules to the IRC. Labour Courts, established under Section 42 of the IRC, primarily deal with matters listed in the Second Schedule, such as the propriety or legality of an order passed by an employer under the standing orders, the discharge or dismissal of workmen including the granting of relief for wrongful dismissal, and the legality of strikes or lock-outs. Industrial Tribunals, established under Section 43 of the IRC, handle more complex disputes listed in the Third Schedule, including wages, period and mode of payment, compensatory and other allowances, hours of work and rest intervals, leave with wages and holidays, bonus, profit sharing, provident fund, gratuity, and rules of discipline. Some disputes, like those relating to retrenchment or closure, can be referred to either. The proceedings before Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals are quasi-judicial in nature. Parties are given the opportunity to present their case, produce evidence, and cross-examine witnesses. Legal practitioners are permitted to represent parties in these proceedings, subject to certain conditions and permissions from the Tribunal, as outlined in Section 77 of the IRC. The objective is to arrive at a fair and just award that resolves the industrial dispute. The IRC mandates specific timelines for the completion of adjudication proceedings. For instance, Section 70(1) of the IRC stipulates that an award in a dispute referred under Section 72 should ordinarily be submitted by the Labour Court or Tribunal to the appropriate government within a period of one year from the date of reference. This timeline aims to expedite justice and prevent prolonged disputes from impacting industrial peace. Failure to comply with an award passed by a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal can lead to severe penalties under Section 106 of the IRC, which includes imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both. For continued contravention, further fine which may extend to two hundred rupees for every day during which the contravention continues. These penalties underscore the binding nature and gravity of tribunal awards. Businesses and startups must approach adjudication with a robust legal strategy, ensuring all relevant documents, evidence, and witness testimonies are meticulously prepared. Non-compliance or a casual approach can result in adverse awards, significant financial penalties, and reputational damage. It is crucial to engage experienced legal counsel specializing in Indian labour and industrial law to navigate these proceedings effectively and protect the company’s interests. The award given by the Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal is final and binding on all parties, subject to judicial review by higher courts.

Key takeaway: Adjudication under Section 72 involves quasi-judicial proceedings in Labour Courts or Industrial Tribunals, requiring robust legal representation and adherence to strict timelines, with awards being final and binding.

Timelines and Penalties for Non-Compliance in 2026

Adherence to prescribed timelines and understanding the penalties for non-compliance are critical aspects of navigating industrial dispute resolution under the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, particularly for businesses operating in India by 2026. The IRC places a strong emphasis on timely resolution to maintain industrial harmony and efficiency.

1. Conciliation Proceedings: As per Section 56(1) of the IRC, conciliation proceedings must be completed within 45 days from the date of reference of the dispute to the Conciliation Officer. This is a crucial initial timeline that all parties must respect. Failure to participate in good faith or to provide necessary information can be viewed unfavorably.

2. Adjudication Proceedings: Section 70(1) of the IRC mandates that Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals should ordinarily submit their awards within one year from the date of reference by the appropriate government. While the term ‘ordinarily’ provides some flexibility, prolonged delays can be subject to scrutiny and may require justification from the adjudicating body. Expedited proceedings are often preferred, especially in high-impact disputes.

3. Publication of Awards: Once an award is received by the appropriate government from the Labour Court or Tribunal, Section 70(3) of the IRC requires its publication within a period of thirty days. The award becomes enforceable upon its publication, or on such date as may be specified therein.

Penalties for Non-Compliance: The IRC provides for stringent penalties to ensure compliance with its provisions, including settlements and awards.

• Breach of Settlement or Award (Section 106): Any person who commits a breach of any term of any settlement or award, which is binding on him under the IRC, is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both. In the case of a continuing breach, a further fine which may extend to two hundred rupees for every day during which the breach continues is imposed. This provision applies to both employers and workmen/unions.

• Illegal Strikes and Lock-outs (Section 85 & 86): Participating in or instigating illegal strikes or lock-outs carries penalties. For instance, an employer commencing, continuing, or otherwise acting in furtherance of an illegal lock-out can face imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both. Similarly, workmen participating in an illegal strike can face fines.

• Non-compliance with Conciliation Officer’s Orders (Section 107): If any person contravenes any order of the Conciliation Officer, they can be punished with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees.

• General Penalty (Section 110): The IRC also includes a general penalty clause for any contravention of its provisions for which no specific penalty is provided. This can lead to a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees.

For startups, these timelines and penalties underscore the importance of legal diligence and proactive engagement in dispute resolution. Ignoring statutory requirements or tribunal awards can lead to not just financial penalties, but also reputational damage, operational disruptions, and even criminal liability for management. Therefore, robust internal compliance mechanisms and expert legal advice are indispensable by 2026.

Key takeaway: The IRC imposes strict timelines for conciliation (45 days) and adjudication (1 year), with significant penalties, including imprisonment and hefty fines, for non-compliance with settlements or awards.

Practical Steps for Businesses and Startups in India 2026

Navigating industrial disputes in India by 2026, especially under the evolving framework of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, requires a proactive and structured approach from businesses and startups. Here are practical steps to mitigate risks and effectively manage potential disputes:

1. Develop Robust Internal Grievance Redressal Mechanisms (IGRM): Before any external intervention, establish a clear, fair, and accessible internal grievance redressal system as mandated by Section 40 of the IRC for establishments employing 20 or more workmen. This includes a Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) with equal representation from the employer and workmen. A well-functioning IGRM can resolve disputes at an early stage, preventing escalation to conciliation or adjudication.

2. Ensure Compliance with Labour Laws: Regularly audit and update internal policies and practices to comply with all applicable provisions of the IRC, Code on Wages, 2019, Code on Social Security, 2020, and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020. Non-compliance is a common trigger for disputes. This includes proper classification of workers, timely payment of wages, adherence to working hours, and maintenance of statutory registers.

3. Maintain Detailed Records: Keep meticulous records of employment contracts, wages, attendance, disciplinary actions, internal inquiries, performance appraisals, and any communication related to employee grievances or union activities. These records are vital evidence during conciliation or adjudication proceedings.

4. Engage in Proactive Communication and Employee Relations: Foster a culture of open communication, transparency, and fairness. Regular engagement with employees, addressing their concerns promptly, and building trust can significantly reduce the likelihood of disputes. For establishments with unions, engage in good-faith collective bargaining.

5. Train Management on Industrial Relations: Equip HR personnel and line managers with comprehensive training on the IRC, grievance handling, disciplinary procedures, and negotiation skills. Their ability to manage employee relations effectively can de-escalate potential conflicts.

6. Seek Expert Legal Counsel Early: Do not wait for a dispute to escalate to conciliation or adjudication. Consult with legal experts specializing in Indian labour and industrial law at the first sign of a potential dispute. Early legal advice can help in strategizing, preparing for conciliation, and representing the company effectively if the matter proceeds to a Labour Court or Tribunal.

7. Prepare for Conciliation: If a dispute is referred for conciliation, participate actively and in good faith. Prepare a clear statement of facts, relevant documents, and a proposed settlement. Be open to negotiation but also firm on your legal position. Document all offers and counter-offers.

8. Strategize for Adjudication: If the dispute proceeds to adjudication under Section 72, work closely with your legal counsel to build a robust case. This involves thorough evidence gathering, witness preparation, and understanding the nuances of the legal arguments. Be prepared for the time and resource commitment involved in tribunal proceedings.

By implementing these steps, businesses and startups can significantly strengthen their position, reduce legal liabilities, and foster a stable industrial environment conducive to growth in India 2026.

Key takeaway: Businesses and startups should establish robust internal grievance mechanisms, ensure legal compliance, maintain detailed records, foster proactive communication, and seek early legal counsel to effectively manage industrial disputes in India 2026.

Impact of the IRC on Startup Ecosystem and Employment Models

The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (IRC), and its anticipated full implementation by 2026, holds significant implications for India’s burgeoning startup ecosystem and the evolving employment models within it. The IRC aims to balance worker protection with ease of doing business, a critical factor for startups that often operate with lean teams and flexible structures. Several provisions directly impact how startups manage their workforce and navigate industrial relations.

One of the most notable changes is the introduction of Fixed-Term Employment (FTE) for all sectors, as specified in Section 2(o) of the IRC. Previously, FTE was primarily available in specific sectors. Now, startups can hire employees for a fixed duration, with such employees being entitled to the same wages, allowances, and other benefits as permanent employees doing similar work, and without the automatic right to notice or compensation for retrenchment upon the expiry of the fixed term. This flexibility allows startups to scale their workforce up or down based on project needs without the long-term liabilities associated with permanent employment, provided the terms are clearly defined in the contract. This is a game-changer for project-based startups or those in rapidly evolving tech sectors.

Another significant aspect is the increased threshold for requiring government permission for retrenchment or closure. Section 77 of the IRC raises this threshold from 100 to 300 workmen. This means that industrial establishments employing fewer than 300 workmen are not required to seek prior government approval for retrenchment, layoff, or closure. While this provides greater operational flexibility for smaller startups, it also places a higher responsibility on them to manage employee relations ethically and fairly, as disputes arising from such actions could still be referred under Section 72. Startups must ensure that any retrenchment adheres to the ‘last in, first out’ principle (LIFO) and provides statutory compensation as per Section 70 of the IRC, which mandates payment of fifteen days’ average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months, to avoid legal challenges.

The IRC also introduces provisions for Reskilling Fund (Section 83), where employers are required to contribute to a fund for the skilling of retrenched workers. While the specifics are still being ironed out, this represents an additional cost and responsibility for startups, even if they fall below the 300-worker threshold for government permission.

Furthermore, the Code streamlines the definition of ‘workman’ (Section 2(zr)) and ‘industrial dispute’ (Section 2(p)), aiming for greater clarity. However, the interpretation of these definitions by Labour Courts and Tribunals will continue to shape how disputes are handled. Startups, with their often flat hierarchies and blurred lines between managerial and non-managerial roles, need to be particularly careful in classifying employees to avoid future disputes regarding worker status.

For startups leveraging gig workers or contract labor, the IRC’s impact is more indirect, as these workers are often outside the direct scope of ‘workman’ as defined. However, the Code on Social Security, 2020, does make provisions for gig workers, indicating a broader legislative intent to cover new forms of employment. Startups must remain vigilant about potential reclassification challenges and ensure their contracts with gig workers are robust and legally sound. The overall aim of the IRC is to create a more investment-friendly environment while providing a safety net for workers, forcing startups to adopt legally compliant and ethically sound HR practices from their inception.

Key takeaway: The IRC significantly impacts startups by enabling fixed-term employment, raising the retrenchment threshold to 300 employees, and requiring contributions to a reskilling fund, demanding flexible yet compliant employment strategies.

Future Outlook: Anticipated Changes and Best Practices for 2026

As India moves towards the full operationalization of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020, by 2026, businesses and startups must anticipate further refinements and adopt best practices to remain compliant and competitive. The legislative landscape is dynamic, and continuous monitoring of rule notifications and judicial interpretations will be crucial.

Anticipated Changes:

1. Clarity on Rules and Subordinate Legislation: While the IRC has been enacted, the detailed rules for its implementation are still being finalized and notified by both Central and State Governments. By 2026, most of these rules are expected to be in full force, providing granular details on aspects like the functioning of Grievance Redressal Committees, procedures for conciliation, and the calculation of various benefits. Businesses must stay updated with these notifications, as they dictate the practical application of the Code’s provisions.

2. Judicial Interpretation: As disputes arise and are adjudicated under the IRC, Labour Courts, Industrial Tribunals, High Courts, and the Supreme Court will interpret various sections, including Section 72. These judicial pronouncements will set precedents and clarify ambiguities, shaping the practical application of the law. Monitoring these judgments will be essential for evolving legal strategies.

3. Digitalization of Labour Compliance: The government’s push for digital governance is likely to extend further into labour compliance. Expect more online portals for registration, filing of returns, and potentially even for initiating conciliation proceedings or tracking dispute statuses. Startups, being digitally native, can leverage these platforms for efficient compliance.

4. Emphasis on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): While Section 72 provides for adjudication, there might be a growing emphasis on encouraging pre-conciliation and other forms of ADR, such as mediation, to reduce the burden on formal judicial bodies. Businesses that proactively engage in such mechanisms may find faster, less adversarial resolutions.

Best Practices for 2026:

1. Proactive Legal Compliance Audits: Conduct regular, independent audits of all employment contracts, HR policies, and compliance records against the latest IRC rules and other labour codes. Identify and rectify any gaps before they escalate into disputes.

2. Continuous Training and Awareness: Invest in ongoing training for HR, management, and even employees on their rights and responsibilities under the IRC. Awareness can prevent unintentional non-compliance and foster a more harmonious workplace.

3. Leverage Technology for HR and Compliance: Implement HRIS (Human Resource Information Systems) and compliance management software to automate record-keeping, track statutory filings, and manage employee data. This ensures accuracy and streamlines compliance processes.

4. Strategic Industrial Relations Management: Develop a clear strategy for managing trade union relations, collective bargaining, and grievance handling. This includes identifying key stakeholders, establishing communication channels, and having contingency plans for potential industrial actions.

5. Build a Strong Employer Brand: A strong employer brand, built on fair practices, transparent policies, and employee welfare, can significantly reduce the likelihood of industrial disputes and attract top talent. This includes adherence to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles.

6. Engage with Industry Associations: Participate actively in industry associations and forums to stay informed about emerging trends, best practices, and advocacy efforts related to labour law reforms. Collective representation can also influence future policy directions.

By embracing these best practices and remaining agile in response to the evolving legal landscape, businesses and startups in India can effectively navigate the industrial relations environment in 2026, ensuring compliance, minimizing disputes, and fostering a productive workforce.

Key takeaway: By 2026, businesses must anticipate clearer IRC rules and judicial interpretations, adopt proactive legal audits, invest in continuous training, leverage HR tech, and build strong employer brands to excel in India’s evolving industrial relations landscape.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Section 72 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020?

Section 72 empowers the appropriate government in India to refer unresolved industrial disputes to a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal for adjudication after conciliation efforts have failed.

Is conciliation mandatory before a Section 72 referral?

Yes, conciliation proceedings are generally a mandatory prerequisite. The Conciliation Officer’s failure report forms the basis for the government’s decision to refer the dispute.

What are the penalties for breaching a tribunal award?

Breaching a binding award under the IRC can lead to imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to ten thousand rupees, or both, with additional fines for continuing breaches.

How does the IRC impact fixed-term employment for startups?

The IRC allows fixed-term employment across all sectors, offering startups flexibility to hire for specific durations while ensuring fixed-term employees receive similar benefits as permanent workers.

What is the new threshold for retrenchment permission under the IRC?

The IRC raises the threshold for requiring government permission for retrenchment, layoff, or closure from 100 to 300 workmen, granting greater operational flexibility to smaller establishments.

---

Streamline your legal research and compliance with LitigaForge AI. Try it free today at litigaforge.com to navigate complex industrial relations effortlessly.

Try it free: LitigaForge AI Legal Analysis