CS Professional December 2025 Question Paper Labour Laws and Practice

FOR CS PROFESSIONAL EXAM PREPARATION

CS Professional 2025
Question Paper · Labour
Laws and Practice
EXAM YEAR TYPE SUBJECT

CS Professional 2025 Question Paper Labour Laws and Practice
DATE

December 2025

Notes · Sample Papers · Previous Year Papers · Mock Tests

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 1 :
Roll No. ..................................... OPEN BOOK EXAMINATION

m
Time allowed : 3 hours
om
Maximum marks : 100
. co
.c e m
e m a s
l : 12
l a s
Total number of questions : 4
a g
Total number of printed pages

ag
NOTE : Answer ALL Questions.

1. Case Study :

m
c. o
Pranav was appointed in the service of Innovative Publications Ltd. (A Company in the

e m he was promoted as Chief of News Bureau.
business of newspaper publications in name of Innovations Daily), as the Chief Sub-Editor

l a s
ag to its Kozhikode Unit on 27.05.2022. However, without
in January, 2020. Thereafter on 01.01.2022

The Company transferred Pranav

accepting the transfer order, on 30.05.2022, he had applied for leave from 01.06.2022 to

30.06.2022. Thereafter, on 01.07.2022, he again applied for leave for a further period of

50 days. Though Pranav had been directed to join duty at Kozhikode, he did not do so.

m
Therefore, the Company issued a letter dated 10.11.2022 cautioning Pranav against taking

m c. o
c. o was issued with a memo dated 29.11.2022 alleging grave misconduct.
leave for such a long duration. Since Pranav did not abide by the said communication, he

e m Pranav joined duty
em l s
a of his duties diligently.
las a g
g
at Kozhikode thereafter. However, he was reluctant to discharge

a Subsequently, Pranav was transferred to Kollam as a Desk Editor of the Quilon Bureau

on 13.04.2023. On 20.06.2023, a memo was issued to Pranav alleging unauthorised leave.

Since he did not show any improvement, a show cause notice dated 22.07.2023 was issued

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o se m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g l
Page 1 of 12

553
: 2 :

to Pranav seeking his explanation. He was also informed by the said communication that
the company would be constrained to terminate his services if his explanation was not submitted
within three days. Pranav did not submit any explanation and therefore, he was dismissed
from service on 05.08.2023. Pranav raised an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Court. Pranav claimed that he was designated
as Chief of News Bureau, the duties discharged by him were those of a Working Journalist.
He was the President of the Working Journalists Union during 2022–2023. During the period
he was President, he had demanded enhancement of the wages inviting the wrath of the
employer. His dismissal is on baseless charges and is motivated by the personal animosity
nurtured by the employer. Though it was contended that his work was supervisory in nature,
no evidence was adduced by the management in support of the said claim.

Pranav’s wife Bhumika was working as a Clerk-Typist in the Office of the Managing Director
(MD) of Fine Fabrics Ltd. and Bhumika was reporting to Mahendra, Senior Manager of
the MD’s Secretariat. The FFL is engaged in manufacturing of synthetic yarn. A meeting
of some foreign clients of the FFL was kept in a Five Star Hotel. Mahendra insisted Bhumika
to go with him to the Hotel for taking dictation from the MD and type out the matter.
Under the pressure of Mahendra, Bhumika went to take the dictation from the MD. While
Bhumika was waiting in adjoining room for the dictation from the MD, Mahendra tried to
sit too close to Bhumika and despite her objection he did not give up his objectionable
behaviour. Bhumika later took dictation from the MD. Mahendra told her to type and get
its print out. Since the laptop and printer were located in the basement of the Hotel, Mahendra
volunteered to show her the basement for getting the matter typed and taking advantage
of the isolated place and again tried to sit very close to her despite her objections. The

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 2 of 12

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 3 :

m
draft typed matter was corrected by MD who asked Bhumika to retype the same. Mahendra

m . c o
o would leave the place if he continued to behave like that, however, Mahendra
again accompanied with Bhumika to the basement and repeated his overtures. Bhumika warned
Mahendra that.cshe
e m
l a s
emand continued his objectionable acts. Next day, Bhumika made a written gcomplaint
s
la MD.
did not stop
a
to gthe
a
Pranav’s child, named Akshay is just 10 years old but performs dance very well and participated
in the School dance competitions. He also participated in the famous TV show of ‘Dance
India’ which is telecasted on the TV having nationwide presence.

In this background, answer the following questions :

m
c. o
(a) Whether Pranav is to be considered as a Working Journalist as per the provisions

e m 1955 ?
of the Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service)

l a s
and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,

ag (5 marks)

(b) Whether Pranav who was working as the Chief of News Bureau of Innovative
Publications Ltd., could be considered to be a workman under the provisions of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ?

(5 marks)

o m
m c
Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) the sexual harassment includes. a demand or request
(c) Under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and

c. o em
for sexual favours or making sexually coloured remarks; aors showing pornography, but
s em l
gla agwith Bhumika to the basement
a
in the given case Mahendra has simply accompanied
of the Hotel to get the matter typed and print and had done nothing which may
amounts to sexual harassment. Further the place was not the Office place of Bhumika
but it was Hotel.

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o s e m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g l
Page 3 of 12

553
: 4 :

Based on the given facts, whether the conduct of Mahendra shall be termed as sexual

harassment when there was no physical contact and despite the fact, the incident

happened in the Hotel which was not the workplace of Bhumika ? Give your answer

with the decided case law.

(5 marks)

(d) Whether performing in the TV Show of ‘Dance India’ by Akshay is a violation of

the provisions of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act,

1986 since this Act prohibits the employment of children in any occupation and

process ?

(5 marks)

(e) How did the Supreme Court justify the introduction of the “doctrine of apportionment

of blame” in the context of unjustified strikes and lockouts during the proceedings

of India Marine Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Their Workmen ?

(5 marks)

2. Bikaner Cold Storage Company Ltd. was carrying on the business of running a cold storage

facility in Rajasthan, where agricultural producers and traders stored their perishable goods,

mainly fruits and vegetables, for preservation. The business essentially required a limited number

of permanent employees such as supervisors, clerks, accountants, mechanics, and helpers to

maintain day-to-day operations like regulating the temperature, maintaining machinery, and

supervising the storage process. However, during peak season when agricultural produce arrived

in bulk there was a temporary need to engage extra labour for loading, unloading, stacking,

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 4 of 12

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 5 :

m
and arranging goods inside the cold storage. These workers were employed for a few days

om . co
m
or weeks depending on the volume of goods, and once the seasonal rush ended, their services

.c s e
m a
eon its permanent rolls and were not engaged in the regular course ofgbusiness
l
were no longer required. The company maintained that such seasonal or casual labourers

l s
were anot
a
g
a only as a stop-gap arrangement to meet temporary demands.
but

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner issued a notice contending that the establishment

fell within the scope of Section 1(3)(a) of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act, 1952, as the strength of employees exceeded twenty including these seasonal

m
and casual workers. The Commissioner argued that since these persons worked under the

c. o
mchallenged this position and filed the case, asserting
control of the establishment and were paid wages, they should be counted as employees

s e
l a
for the purpose of the Act. The company

ag and regular employees was below twenty and that inclusion
that the actual number of permanent

of temporary or casual labourers would unfairly extend the application of the Act to establishments

that otherwise did not meet the statutory threshold. The main issue before the Rajasthan

High Court was whether temporary or seasonal workers, engaged for shorter durations

and not forming a permanent part of the business, could be treated as “employees” under
m
m
Section 1(3)(a) of the Employees’ Provident Fund Act for the purpose of determining the
c. o
c. o statutory strength of twenty employees. s e m
s em a
The Rajasthan High Court held that the persons employed inglthe normal and regular course
gla a
a of business of the establishment should be treated as “employees” for the purpose of Section

1(3)(a). However, persons employed only for shorter durations, whose engagement was not

a regular feature of the business of the cold storage, could not be included in determining

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o s e m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g l
Page 5 of 12

553
: 6 :

the employee strength. Accordingly, casual or seasonal workers brought in temporarily during

peak demand were excluded from the calculation. On this basis, the Court concluded that

the Act could not be made applicable to the petitioner establishment, as the required threshold

of twenty employees was not satisfied.

(a) How did the Rajasthan High Court distinguish between regular employees and

casual/seasonal workers in determining the applicability of Section 1(3)(a) of the

EPF Act ?

(b) What legal principles of statutory interpretation did the Court apply in determining

the scope of “employees” under Section 1(3)(a) of the EPF Act ?

(c) Explain the provisions of Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 in connection with the offences

committed by companies and penalty provisions.

(d) Enumerate the non-applicability of EPF and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 to

certain establishments.

(e) ‘The fundamental principles lie in recognising the labour as human beings and not

as the commodity and ensuring their spiritual conditions of freedom and dignity of

economic security, equal opportunity and the peace could only be attained, if it is

based on social justice’. Elaborate the aforesaid declaration adopted by International

Labour Organisation (ILO) after the World War II.

(5 marks each)

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 6 of 12

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 7 :

m
3. Smt. Sundarbai was the widow of a workman employed at the Ordnance Factory, Khamaria,

om . co
c m
Jabalpur. Her husband was engaged in the factory’s operations, which involved regular and

m . se
s e
strenuous physical labour. While performing his duties in the course of employment, he suddenly
g l a
g l a a
a the result of strain and stress arising from his employment. Sundarbai applied for
collapsed and later died. The cause of death was linked to a heart attack, which she contended

was

compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, claiming that her husband's

death amounted to an “accident arising out of and in the course of employment.” The employer,

the Ordnance Factory management, resisted the claim on the ground that the workman’s

o m
death was due to a natural disease, namely heart failure, and not an accident. They argued
c
. or unexpected event traceable to the nature
e m
that unless there was some untoward mishap

of work, the incident could not beas
g l treated as an “accident” under the Act. Therefore, they
a
maintained that the claim for compensation was not maintainable. The matter eventually reached

the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The principal issue before the High Court was whether the death of Sundarbai’s husband

due to heart failure while performing his ordinary duties in the factory could be treated as

o m
c
an “accident” within the meaning of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. The Court
m . between the work
c. o had to examine whether there must be a direct and immediate causal s e mlink

em l a
las and the injury, or whether even the ordinary strain of
ag connection. Another issue was
work, if it accelerated or aggravated

ag a pre-existing condition, would be sufficient to establish such

how to differentiate between “injury” caused by accident and death resulting from natural

disease not connected with employment.

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o s e m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g lPage 7 of 12

553
: 8 :

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled in favour of Smt. Sundarbai, clarifying the scope
of the expressions “accident” and “injury” under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The
Court held that an “accident” is not limited to external mishaps, falls, or injuries caused by
violent occurrences. Instead, it can also include cases where the ordinary strain of ordinary
work leads to or accelerates a physical breakdown, such as heart failure, provided there
is a causal connection between the employment and the injury. The Court drew a distinction
between “injury” and “accident” : an injury is the physical harm or medical condition suffered
by the workman, whereas an accident is the untoward event in the course of employment
that causes or accelerates such injury. If a workman, while performing his regular duties,
suffers from a heart attack and it is shown that the strain of employment contributed to
or hastened the fatal result, then such death can be said to arise “out of and in the course
of employment.” The fact that the employee may have had a pre-existing heart condition
was not material if the employment strain accelerated the injury. Applying this principle, the
Court held that Sundarbai’s husband died because the stress and strain of his ordinary duties
had accelerated his heart failure, and thus the death was an “accident” connected with his
employment. Consequently, the widow was entitled to compensation under the Employees’
Compensation Act.

In the background of the given information, answer the following questions :

(a) How did the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Sundarbai’s case interpret the concept
of “accident” under the Employees’ Compensation Act and why was this interpretation
significant ?

(5 marks)

(b) In what way did the Court distinguish between “injury” and “accident” in Sundarbai’s
case, and how did this affect the outcome ?

(5 marks)

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 8 of 12

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 9 :

m
(c) What is meant by minimum rate of wages under The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 ?

om
How is it fixed/revised ?
. co
.c e m
e m l a s
(5 marks)

l a s ag
ag
(d) What are the features of the Code on Social Security 2020 ?

(5 marks)

(e) Sunidhi is Asstt. Manager in Quality Bank Ltd, Noida. She resides in a 2BHK flat
which has been provided by the Bank with her college time friend Sandeep. Both
of them are not a married couple, but staying in ‘live-in-relationship’. After some

m
c. o
time Sunidhi gave the birth to a baby girl. To avail the benefits under the Maternity

e m refused to grant any benefits under the Act to
Benefit Act, 1961, she immediately applied for maternity leave and other benefits.

l
However, the Manager of the
a s Bank

ag record her marital status was marked as unmarried. Whether
Sunidhi since in the Bank's
the contention of the Bank Manager in not granting her maternity leave and other
benefits is justified ?

(5 marks)

m
4. The Poona Employees Union was registered in 1986 as a general union intended to operate

m c. o
c. o applied to the Additional Registrar of Trade Unions under Sectionsem
across industries within Pune district. Years later, D’Souza, a former president of the Union,

em aalleged that registration had
10 of the Trade Unions

s Act, 1926, seeking cancellation of the Union’s registration. g l
la a and rules failed to identify
He

ag been obtained by “fraud or mistake” and that the application
a specific industry, rendering the registration invalid. Acting on this application, the Additional
Registrar cancelled the Union’s registration. On appeal, however, the Industrial Court, Pune

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o s e m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g l Page 9 of 12

553
: 10 :

on 11th April 2008 set aside the cancellation, holding that the Registrar’s action was legally

unsustainable. D’Souza then invoked Article 226 before the Bombay High Court on 25th

February 2009, which affirmed the Industrial Court’s Order. Persisting, D’Souza appealed

to the Supreme Court. During the Supreme Court proceedings, he argued that the Union’s

omission to specify the industry contravened Sections 4 to 6 and the prescribed forms/regulations;

he also relied on decisions such as Indian Express (Bom) Employees Union v. K.M. Desai

and Forbes Forbes Campbell on strict compliance with registration particulars. The Union,

represented by senior counsel, countered that (i) Section 10 allows cancellation only on an

application by a trade union or suo motu by the Registrar not at the instance of a private

individual; (ii) the phrase “any industry” in its application and rules reflected a legitimate general

union across all industries in Pune; (iii) the 2001 statutory amendments (effective 9 January

2002) to Sections 4 to 6 could not be retrofitted to a 1986 registration; and (iv) the Registrar

had not conducted the requisite inquiry or satisfied Rule 8(2) of the Bombay Trade Union

Regulations, 1926.

The Supreme Court in D’Souza v Poona Employees Union (2015) held that cancellation

of a trade union’s registration under Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 can only

be sought by the trade union itself or initiated suo motu by the Registrar, and not by a

private individual. Since D'Souza was merely a former office-bearer, he had no locus standi

to maintain such proceedings. The Court further clarified that the expression “obtained by

fraud or mistake” refers to fraud or mistake on the part of the union at the time of obtaining

registration, and not an error of the Registrar in granting registration. Even if the Registrar

had made a mistake, that could not justify cancellation under Section 10. Moreover, the

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 10 of 12

co m .
. s e
em l a

as a g
553
: 11 :

m
cancellation order passed in this case was procedurally flawed as no proper enquiry or

om . co
c m
show-cause notice was given, and the requirements of Rule 8(2) of the Bombay Trade Union

m . s e
e a
l Pune
Regulations were not followed. On the substantive objection, the Court held that the use
s
of theaexpression
l a g
g
“any industry” in the Union’s application meant “all industries” within
a and therefore the Union was validly a general union. The absence of specifying a
district,

single industry did not invalidate its registration. The precedents cited by the appellant were

distinguished as factually different. The Court also emphasized that the 2001 amendments to

Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Act could not be applied retrospectively to a registration granted

m
in 1986. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the validity of the Poona Employees

c. o
m
Union's registration was upheld.

How did the Supreme Courtsein D’Souza v. Poona Employees Union interpret the
(a)
g l a
a the Trade Unions Act, 1926 with regard to locus standi ?
scope of Section 10 of

(5 Marks)

(b) Discuss how the Supreme Court differentiated between a ‘mistake by the union’ and

a ‘mistake by the Registrar’ under Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act.

m
co Court under
(5 marks)
m .
c. o (c) s em
The jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 is wider than Supreme

s em g lajurisdiction not only for the
la a of any legal right. Elucidate
Article 32 because the High Court can exercise its writ

ag enforcement of fundamental rights but also for enforcement

this statement in light of the decided case law.

(5 marks)

2/2025/LLP/OBE P.T.O.

m . c
c. o s e m
m a
se
For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit
g l
Page 11 of 12

553
: 12 :

(d) “No work, no pay” is the general principle, which means that an employee is not
entitled to wages for the period when they haven’t worked. However, pensioners
are being paid even for not working at all. Is it a bounty or ex-gratia payment for
the past service rendered ? Analyse this with the decided case law.

(5 marks)

(e) Mehar, who is a Company Secretary was invited as Chief Guest in a Debate Competition
organised by the City Law College. The law students were given the following topic
for debate :

“The Code on Wages, 2019 is merely the amalgamation of the existing enactments
relating to wages and has not widened the scope of minimum wages to all
workers”.

Ten students participated in the debate, five in favour of the Code and five against
the Code. At the end of the debate session, Mehar was invited to say few words
about the Code. Write down the speech highlighting the key points of the Code
on Wages and how the Code would facilitate the implementation and ease of compliance
of labour laws.

(5 marks)

————— o —————

2/2025/LLP/OBE Contd. ........

For more Question Papers, Sample Papers, Notes & Syllabus visit Page 12 of 12