In accordance with constitution of India, the decision to involve in strike by the employees is made illegal by the government in various ways. Substantiate (200 Words)
Refer - The Hindu
Enrich the answer from other sources, if the question demands.
IAS Parliament 3 years
KEY POINTS
· 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.
· Even the fundamental right to form an association can be restricted under Article 19(4) in the interest of public order and other considerations.
· The Supreme Court in Delhi Police v. Union of India (1986) upheld the restrictions to form association by the members of the non-gazetted police force after the Police Forces (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966.
· While the right to freedom of association is fundamental, recognition of such association is not a fundamental right.
· In T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003), the Supreme Court held that the employees have no fundamental right to resort to strike.
· There is no fundamental right to strike under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
· Strikes cannot be justified on any equitable ground. Strike as a weapon is mostly misused which results in chaos.
· Though the employees of OFB have threatened to go on strike, Parliament, which has the right to restrict even the fundamental rights of the armed forces, is well within its right to expressly prohibit resorting to strike.
Abdul hakkim 3 years
Please review mam/sir
Thanks
IAS Parliament 3 years
Try to include more cases and bring coherence in the answer. Keep Writing.
