The Delhi High Court has held that a workman cannot seek wages under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, where the Labour Court has not passed an award directing reinstatement, but has instead granted lump sum compensation in lieu of reinstatement and consequential benefits.
Justice Shail Jain dismissed an application moved by the petitioner-workman seeking relief under Section 17B, which provides for payment of full last drawn wages to a workman during the pendency of proceedings before the High Court or Supreme Court, where an employer challenges an award directing reinstatement.
The Court observed that the statutory protection under Section 17B is specifically attracted only when a Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal has directed reinstatement of the workman, and the employer has challenged that award before a superior court.
In the present case, however, the Labour Court had not ordered reinstatement. Instead, it awarded Rs. 1 lakh as lump sum compensation to the workman in lieu of reinstatement and other consequential benefits.
In view of this, the Court held that the essential condition for invoking Section 17B was absent and therefore the provision had no application to the case.
Accordingly, the application seeking payment of wages under Section 17B was dismissed.
Separately, the Court allowed the petitioner’s application seeking condonation of 82 days’ delay in filing written submissions, taking the written submissions on record. The main writ petition has now been listed for arguments on September 29, 2026.
