Conciliation under industrial, family and marriage laws

1. Industrial disputes: the conciliation officer

• Appointment (section 43; old section 4). The appropriate Government may by notification appoint conciliation officers “charged with the duty of mediating in and promoting the settlement of industrial disputes”, for a specified area or industries, permanently or for a limited period.
• Duty to hold conciliation (section 53(1); old section 12(1)). Where an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, or a strike or lock-out notice under section 62 has been given, the conciliation officer shall hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed manner, but not after two years from the date the dispute arose.
• Investigation and inducement (section 53(2)). He shall without delay investigate the dispute and all matters affecting its merits and right settlement, and may do all such things as he thinks fit to induce the parties to come to a fair and amicable settlement.
• Success (section 53(3)). He sends a report to the Government with a memorandum of settlement signed by the parties.
• Failure (section 53(4) and (5)). He sends a full report to the parties and the Government, setting out the steps taken, the facts and the reasons why settlement failed, within 45 days of the start of conciliation (14 days where a strike or lock-out notice was given), extendable by written agreement of the parties with his approval.
• After failure (section 53(6)). Any party may apply to the Industrial Tribunal within 90 days of receiving the failure report. Under the old Act, adjudication needed a government reference under section 10.
• Powers (section 49; old section 11). He may follow such procedure as he thinks fit (section 49(1)); enter the premises of the establishment after reasonable notice (section 49(2)); and has the powers of a civil court to enforce attendance and examine on oath, compel production of documents and issue commissions (section 49(3) and (4)). He is a public servant (section 49(6)).
• Commencement and conclusion (section 60; old section 20). Conciliation is deemed to commence on the first meeting held after receipt of a strike or lock-out notice, and to conclude when the memorandum of settlement is signed, when failure is recorded, or on a reference to the National Industrial Tribunal.
• Effect of pendency (section 62(1)(d) and (2)(d)). No strike or lock-out during conciliation before a conciliation officer and for seven days after it concludes.
• Binding effect (section 57). A settlement in conciliation binds all parties to the dispute and all present and future workers of the establishment, whereas a settlement outside conciliation binds only the signatories.

The old Act also had Boards of Conciliation (section 5) and Courts of Inquiry (section 6). The Code has no counterpart to either.

2. Voluntary and compulsory conciliation in industrial law

Under section 12(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, conciliation was compulsory in a dispute relating to a public utility service where a strike or lock-out notice under section 22 had been given: the conciliation officer “shall” hold proceedings. In other disputes it was discretionary: he “may” do so. Reference to a Board of Conciliation was at the Government's discretion. Voluntary conciliation meant the parties themselves invoking the officer or settling under his auspices.

The Code removes much of this distinction. Section 53(1) uses “shall” for every existing or apprehended industrial dispute, and the strike and lock-out notice requirement in section 62 extends to every industrial establishment, not only public utility services. In every case, what is compulsory is the attempt; no party can be compelled to accept a settlement.

3. Family Courts Act, 1984

• Section 9(1): in every suit or proceeding, the Family Court shall endeavour in the first instance, where possible consistent with the nature and circumstances of the case, to assist and persuade the parties to arrive at a settlement, following such procedure as it thinks fit, subject to High Court rules.
• Section 9(2): if at any stage there is a reasonable possibility of settlement, the court may adjourn to enable attempts to be made.
• Sections 5 and 6: association of social welfare agencies and appointment of counsellors to assist the court.
• Section 10(3): the court may lay down its own procedure to arrive at a settlement or the truth.
• Section 19(2): no appeal lies from a decree or order passed by the Family Court with the consent of the parties.

4. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

• Section 23(2): before granting any relief, it is the duty of the court in the first instance, where possible, to make every endeavour to bring about a reconciliation between the parties. The proviso excludes petitions on certain grounds in section 13(1), such as conversion, renunciation of the world and presumption of death, where reconciliation would be pointless.
• Section 23(3): to aid reconciliation, the court may, if the parties desire or it thinks just, adjourn the proceedings for a reasonable period not exceeding fifteen days and refer the matter to a person named by the parties or nominated by the court, with directions to report on whether reconciliation has been effected.
• Section 13B: divorce by mutual consent after the cooling-off period; in Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, 2017 INSC 896, (2017) 8 SCC 746, the six-month period in section 13B(2) was held directory, and the court may waive it where settlement efforts, including mediation, have failed and there is no chance of reunion.

In K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, 2013 INSC 122, (2013) 5 SCC 226, the Court directed that matrimonial disputes be referred to mediation at the earliest stage, and asked mediation centres to set up pre-litigation desks.

5. Problems

(a) A Family Court judge referred a divorce case to mediation, and the proceedings were held. One party now wants the case settled before the Family Court instead. Decide. (December 2019)

Issue. Whether a party referred to mediation must settle there, or may return to the Family Court. Law. Section 9 of the Family Courts Act makes settlement efforts a duty of the court itself, and section 23(2) and (3) of the Hindu Marriage Act let the court attempt reconciliation and refer the parties to a person for the purpose. Mediation on a court reference is voluntary as to outcome (compare section 7(3) of the Mediation Act, 2023, not yet in force: the parties are under no obligation to settle), and court-annexed mediation rules provide for the mediator to return the case with a report stating only whether it was settled. Application. Either party may decline to continue in mediation. The mediator will then return the file to the Family Court with a non-settlement report that does not disclose what happened in mediation (Moti Ram v. Ashok Kumar, 2010 INSC 859, (2011) 1 SCC 466). The Family Court, under section 9, may then itself attempt settlement, with counsellors if needed. If the parties settle before it, it may pass a decree in terms of the settlement (and, if they seek divorce by mutual consent, act under section 13B). Conclusion. The party may have the matter settled before the Family Court; reference to mediation does not take away the court's own duty and power to settle.

(b) Ram filed a divorce petition against his wife Usha. On the consent of both, the Family Court passed a decree of divorce. Usha then appealed to the High Court. Decide. (June 2019)

Law. Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act gives an appeal to the High Court from every judgment or order not interlocutory, but section 19(2) says no appeal lies from a decree or order passed with the consent of the parties. Application. The decree was passed on Usha's consent. Her appeal is barred by section 19(2). If her consent was obtained by fraud, force or undue influence, the decree is not truly a consent decree: her remedy is to apply to the Family Court itself to set it aside on that ground, on the principle of Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC that a compromise decree is challenged before the court that passed it. Conclusion. The appeal is not maintainable.

How this is examined

Asked as “Explain the difference between voluntary and compulsory conciliation under the I.D. Act, 1947” (November 2021), “Describe briefly the powers and duties of a Conciliation Officer” (December 2019) and “Explain the conciliation under Industrial Disputes Act” (June 2019). Begin by stating that the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 has replaced the Act from 21 November 2025, then give sections 43, 49, 53, 57, 60 and 62 with the old numbers. The two family law problems recur and are answered from section 9 and section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act.