By : Pankaj Kumar Rathaur (Director, www.sattachintan.com)
On August 05, 2021 the Essential Defence Services Bill, 2021 was passed by the Rajya Sabha. The Union Minister of Defence opined that this Bill seeks for maintenance of essential defence services so as “to secure the security of nation and the life and property of the public at large” and avert staff of the government-owned ordnance factories from going on strike.
The Bill permits the Union Government to prohibit strikes, lock-outs, and lay-offs in units engaged in essential defence services. The provisions in the Bill also empower the Union Government to declare services mentioned in it as “essential defence services” and ban strikes and lockouts in any industrial institutions or unit involved in such services.
Nonetheless, the Union Minister of Defence guaranteed the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) employees that their service conditions will not be affected. Further, the Bill does not come into effect unless it is invoked by the Union Government and it functions for a year only.
In looking into the constitutionality of such matters, under Article 33 of the Constitution, Parliament, by law, can restrict or abrogate the rights of the members of the armed forces or the forces charged with the maintenance of public order so as to ensure the proper discharge of their duties and maintenance of discipline among them. Therefore, for the armed forces and the police, where discipline is the most vitalprecondition, even the fundamental right to form an association can be constrained under Article 19(4) in the interest of public order and other considerations.
This is not for the first time that strikes by government employees are being banned by the government. The Madhya Pradesh (and Chhattisgarh) Civil Services Rules, 1965, bars demonstrations and strikes by government servants and direct the competent authorities to treat the durations as unauthorised absence.A strike under this rule includes “total or partial cessation of work”, a pen-down strike, a traffic jam, or any such activity resulting in termination or delay of work. In consonance with such rules, other States too have comparable provisions to ban strikes.
In conclusion, it can be observed that there is no “fundamental right to strike” under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. So, strikes cannot be legitimised on any equitable ground. Often such strike acts as a weapon which is mostly misused which results in anarchy. However, the employees of OFB have intimidated to go on strike, Parliament of India, which has the right to restrict even the fundamental rights of the armed forces, is well within its right to clearlyspecify prohibitions to individuals who aretrying to strike.