In a significant judgment that brings much-needed clarity to the transition between old and new labour laws, the Karnataka High Court has ruled that existing Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals will continue to exercise their powers even after the implementation of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020.

The Court emphasized that the law does not allow for a "legal vacuum" where workers and employers are left without a forum for justice simply because new administrative bodies are yet to be fully established.

The case arose from a technical but vital legal dispute. With the Central Government moving toward the full implementation of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (IR Code), many of the older statutes—including the landmark Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act)—are slated for repeal.

The petitioner, Glastronix LLP, approached the High Court challenging a government order dated December 19, 2025. This order had referred a dispute between the company and its employees' union to the Industrial Tribunal in Bengaluru under the old 1947 Act.

The company argued that since the new Industrial Relations Code had been officially notified and brought into force on November 21, 2025, the government no longer had the authority to refer cases under the "repealed" 1947 Act. In essence, they claimed the old system was dead and the referral was legally invalid.

Presiding over the matter, Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde dismissed the petition, providing a robust explanation of how legal transitions work. The Court’s decision rested on several pillars:

1. Preventing a "Vacuum"

The Court noted that while the new Code contemplates the creation of new Tribunals and National Industrial Tribunals, these bodies have not yet been constituted or made functional in many regions. If the old Labour Courts were stripped of their power before the new ones were ready, there would be no authority left to settle industrial disputes. The Court held that Section 104 of the Code (the saving clause) was specifically designed to prevent such a scenario.

2. The Scope of "Statutory Authorities"

A key argument raised by the company was that the term "Labour Court" was not explicitly mentioned in certain sub-sections of the new Code's saving clauses. However, Justice Hegde took a broad and practical view. He ruled that the expression "statutory authorities" is wide enough to encompass Labour Courts.

"Though it is urged that the word 'Labour Court' is not found in Section 104 (1A) of the Code, 2020, the Court is of the view that the expression statutory authorities found in Section 104(1A) would also include the Labour Courts," the Bench observed.

3. Protection Under the General Clauses Act

Even if one were to argue that the 1947 Act stood repealed, the Court pointed to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. This traditional legal principle ensures that actions taken while a law was in force (or during its phase-out period) remain valid. Therefore, the reference made by the government in December 2025 was protected.

The Karnataka High Court’s stance aligns with a recent similar ruling by the Kerala High Court. Both courts have recognized that the transition to the four new Labour Codes is a massive administrative undertaking. By allowing existing tribunals to function, the judiciary is ensuring that the "wheels of industrial justice" do not grind to a halt while the government sets up the new infrastructure.

For the common man, HR professionals, and factory owners, this judgment means:

Ongoing Cases are Safe: Cases currently pending in Labour Courts do not need to be dismissed or restarted.
New Referrals are Valid: Even if the new Code is "active," the government can still use the machinery of the old Act until the new Tribunals are officially inaugurated.
No Delay in Justice: The transition to the new Labour Codes will be a "relay race" rather than a hard stop, ensuring continuity in legal proceedings.\

The ruling in Glastronix LLP v. Glastronix Karmika Sangha serves as a reminder that the spirit of the law is to provide a remedy, not to create procedural hurdles. By confirming that Labour Courts are "statutory authorities" that survive the repeal of the ID Act during the transition, the Karnataka High Court has secured the rights of thousands of workers and employers across the state.

Case Details:

Case Title: Glastronix LLP v. Glastronix Karmika Sangha & Ors.
Case Number: W.P. No. 3784 of 2026
Court: Karnataka High Court
Bench: Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde