Rule 3 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Rule 3 does two jobs. Rule 3(1) says how references to the Central Government and to Central labour officers are read for a Union territory without a legislature. Rule 3(2) names who is the "employer" for certain Government and railway establishments, by reference to clause (m) of section 2 of the Code.
For a Union territory without legislature, where the appropriate Government is the Central Government, references to the Central Government are read as references to the Administrator, and references to the labour officers (Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) and others) are read as references to the respective authorities appointed by the Administrator (rule 3(1)). For Government industries not covered by s.2(m)(ii), the officer-in-charge of the establishment is the employer (rule 3(2)(a)). For railways, the employer is the General Manager, the officer-in-charge, or the District Officer-in-charge, Divisional Personnel Officer or Personnel Officer, depending on the establishment and on whether the worker is regular or casual (rule 3(2)(b)).
Rule 3 at a glance
| Provision | Subject | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 3(1) | Union territory without legislature, appropriate Government is the Centre | Central Government read as the Administrator; Central labour officers read as the authorities appointed by the Administrator |
| 3(2)(a) | Industry carried on by or under a Ministry or Department of the Central or a State Government, not an industry referred to in s.2(m)(ii) | Officer-in-charge of the establishment is the employer |
| 3(2)(b)(i) | Railways, regular railway servants (other than casual labour), Zonal Railway establishment | General Manager is the employer |
| 3(2)(b)(ii) | Railways, regular railway servants (other than casual labour), establishment independent of a Zonal Railway | Officer-in-charge of the establishment is the employer |
| 3(2)(b)(iii) | Casual labour on a Zonal Railway or an independent railway establishment | District Officer-in-charge, Divisional Personnel Officer or Personnel Officer, as the case may be, is the employer |
Rule 3(1): Union territories without a legislature
Rule 3(1) says that "the reference to the Central Government or the Government of India, in relation to an industrial dispute in respect of a Union territory without legislature, shall be construed as a reference to the Administrator of such Union territory, for which the appropriate Government is the Central Government". The same sub-rule reads the references to the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) and Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) "as reference to the respective appropriate authority, appointed in that behalf by the Administrator".
Three points:
- It applies "in relation to an industrial dispute" in a Union territory without legislature. It does not say the same for Union territories with a legislature.
- It applies where the Central Government is the appropriate Government (see section 2 on the appropriate Government).
- The Central labour officers named in the Rules are read as the Administrator's authorities, so a worker or employer in such a territory looks to those authorities, not to the Central officers in Delhi or a Regional office.
If you run a unit in a Union territory, check which Government is the appropriate Government and which officer holds the power before filing. Our labour law compliance team can help you work out the correct authority.
Rule 3(2): who is the "employer"
Rule 3(2) is made "with reference to clause (m) of section 2 of the Code". Section 2(m) is the definition of "employer" (see our article on employer, worker and fixed term employment). The rule fills in who the employer is where an industry is run by a Government department, where an individual owner or company does not exist.
Government industries: rule 3(2)(a)
For "an industry, not being an industry referred to in sub clause (ii) thereof, carried on by or under the authority of a Ministry or Department of the Central Government or a State Government", the officer-in-charge of the industrial establishment is the employer in respect of that establishment. The exclusion refers to sub-clause (ii) of s.2(m), which the Rules do not restate, so read the Code text for what it covers.
Railways: rule 3(2)(b)
For "an industry concerning railways, carried on by or under the authority of a Ministry or Department of the Central Government", the employer depends on two things: the type of establishment and whether the worker is a regular railway servant or casual labour.
| Worker | Establishment | Employer |
|---|---|---|
| Regular railway servants other than casual labour | Zonal Railway | General Manager |
| Regular railway servants other than casual labour | Independent of a Zonal Railway | Officer-in-charge of the establishment |
| Casual labour | Zonal Railway or any other railway establishment independent of a Zonal Railway | District Officer-in-charge, Divisional Personnel Officer or Personnel Officer, as the case may be |
The rule sets this for the purposes of the Rules. It therefore decides who signs a settlement, who receives a notice and who is the party to a dispute in a railway establishment.
Why it matters
Many Code procedures name "the employer": who constitutes a Works Committee, who signs a settlement (see rule 4 on the memorandum of settlement), who gives a notice of strike or retrenchment, and who is liable. In a private establishment the answer is usually clear from the Code's own definition. In a Government or railway establishment it is not, because there is no single owner. Rule 3(2) gives a named officer for the purposes of the Rules, so a union or a worker knows whom to address and who answers.
Practical example
Example (invented). A union in a railway workshop that is independent of a Zonal Railway wants to start a settlement discussion. Under rule 3(2)(b)(ii), the officer-in-charge of the establishment is the employer for regular railway servants, and he is the party who signs under rule 4(2)(a). For casual labour at the same workshop, rule 3(2)(b)(iii) points to the District Officer-in-charge, Divisional Personnel Officer or Personnel Officer, as the case may be, so the union may need to deal with a different officer for the two groups.
Need help identifying the employer and authority for your establishment?
Where a dispute touches a Government department, a railway establishment or a Union territory, the first question is who the employer is and which authority acts. Our labour law compliance team can help you map the parties and authorities before you file anything.
Key takeaways
- Rule 3(1) reads Central Government references as the Administrator, for a Union territory without legislature where the Centre is the appropriate Government.
- The Central labour officers are read as the authorities appointed by the Administrator (rule 3(1)).
- For Government industries not covered by s.2(m)(ii), the officer-in-charge is the employer (rule 3(2)(a)).
- For railways, the employer depends on Zonal or independent establishment and on regular or casual workers (rule 3(2)(b)).
- The Central Rules apply to Central-sphere establishments; State Governments have their own rules.
Read next
- Rule 1-2: short title, commencement and definitions
- Rule 4: memorandum of settlement
- Section 2: definitions of appropriate Government and authorities
- Industrial disputes under the new labour codes: IR Code 2020
Disclaimer: Based on the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (as enacted) and, where noted, the Industrial Relations (Central) Rules, 2026 (G.S.R. 342(E), 8 May 2026), as on 30 September 2026. The Code is in force from 21 November 2025; some provisions may be notified later, and State Governments make their own rules for establishments where the State is the appropriate Government. Verify the current position before acting.