It is interesting to note that the constitutional validity of section 36 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947  was challenged before the Delhi High Court in the matter of The Cooperative Store Limited, New Delhi v. O.P.Dwivedi, P.O.Industrial Tribunal –II & Others, reported in 1988 1 LLJ 135.In the case of Madras –Bangalore Transport Company Vs. The Madras –Bangalore Transport Company Worker's Union and Ors., reported in (1964) II LLJ 614 Kant, a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court held  that the limited restriction imposed by S.36 in a law sanctioned by Parliament in the exercise of its legislative competence as conferred by the Constitution, cannot be viewed as an abridgment of any fundamental right. A three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court interpreted the said provision in the case of Paradip Port Trust v. Their Workmen And Management of Keonjhar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs.  Their Workmen, reported in (1977) 2 SCC 339.

However, thereafter when the same issue came up before the Allahabad High Court, Markandeya Katju, J (as he then was) vide his decision in ICI India Ltd. v. Labour Court (IV) & Another) reported in 1992-1- LLN 972, has held that Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act and a similar provision i.e. Section 6-I(2) of the UP Industrial Disputes Act are ultra vires of the Constitution.

In Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Anr., reported in (2004) 6 SCC 254, the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that a  parliamentary legislation when receives the assent of the President of India and published in an Official Gazette, unless specifically excluded, will apply to the entire territory of India. If passing of a  legislation gives rise to a cause of action, a writ petition questioning the constitutionality thereof can be filed in any High Court of the country. It futher held that an order passed on a writ petition questioning the constitutionality of a Parliamentary Act whether interim or final keeping in view the provisions contained in Clause (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, will have effect throughout the territory of India subject of course to the applicability of the Act.

Here we have a situation where the Delhi High Court has upheld the validity of Section 36 of the I.D Act and the Allahabad High Court has said that the same is unconstitutional.

Under the circumstances, what  would be the effect on the rest of the Country?