Sections 63 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.
Section 63 says when a strike or lock-out is illegal, and when it is not. Section 64 bars anyone from knowingly spending money in direct furtherance or support of an illegal strike or lock-out. Together with s.62, they fix the legal line around industrial action, which matters for any employer building a labour law compliance routine.
A strike or lock-out is illegal if it is commenced or declared in contravention of section 62 or continued in contravention of an order under section 42(7) (s.63(1)). One that already exists when a dispute is filed or referred is not illegal to continue, if it was lawful at its start and not barred by an order (s.63(2)). A lock-out in consequence of an illegal strike, or a strike in consequence of an illegal lock-out, is not illegal (s.63(3)). No person may knowingly spend money in direct furtherance or support of an illegal strike or lock-out (s.64).
Section 63 at a glance
| Sub-section | Rule |
|---|---|
| 63(1)(i) | Illegal if commenced or declared in contravention of s.62 |
| 63(1)(ii) | Illegal if continued in contravention of an order under s.42(7) |
| 63(2) | Existing strike or lock-out at the time of filing or reference: continuance not illegal, if lawful at start and not prohibited by a s.42(7) order |
| 63(3) | Lock-out in consequence of illegal strike, or strike in consequence of illegal lock-out, not illegal |
When a strike or lock-out is illegal: s.63(1)
Two routes make it illegal.
- Contravention of s.62. Any strike or lock-out commenced or declared without the notices, waiting periods or in breach of the pendency bars of s.62 is illegal. See section 62 for the seven grounds, which include no notice within sixty days before, action within fourteen days of notice, and action during conciliation, Tribunal, arbitration or while a settlement or award is in operation.
- Continuing against an order under s.42(7). Section 42 deals with voluntary arbitration (see section 42); where a dispute has been referred to arbitration and a notification has been issued under s.42(5), s.42(7) lets the appropriate Government, by order, prohibit the continuance of any strike or lock-out in connection with that dispute which is in existence on the date of the reference. Continuing in defiance of that order is illegal.
The tests refer to when the action "commenced or declared" for the first route, and "continued" for the second. So a strike that was lawful on day one may still turn illegal later if it is continued against a s.42(7) order.
Existing action and the dispute filed: s.63(2)
Where a strike or lock-out "in pursuance of an industrial dispute has already commenced and is in existence at the time of the filing of the application relating to such industrial dispute in the Tribunal or of the reference of such industrial dispute to an arbitrator or a National Industrial Tribunal", continuing it "shall not be deemed to be illegal", provided that:
- it "was not at its commencement in contravention of the provisions of this Code"; or
- its continuance "was not prohibited under sub-section (7) of section 42".
Read the sentence as written in the Code. It protects the continuance of action that began lawfully. It does not cure an action that started illegally. The protection also does not extend to a strike or lock-out whose continuance is prohibited by the s.42(7) order.
Example (invented). A union serves notice in compliance with s.62 and strikes on the notified date, after the conciliation and waiting periods. A party then files an application before the Tribunal. The strike does not become illegal merely because proceedings are now pending, since s.63(2) says continuance is not deemed illegal when the strike was lawful at its commencement. Had the strike begun without notice, it would have been illegal from the start under s.63(1)(i).
Retaliation: s.63(3)
"A lock-out declared in consequence of an illegal strike or a strike declared in consequence of an illegal lock-out shall not be deemed to be illegal." So if workers strike illegally and the employer responds with a lock-out as a consequence, the lock-out is not illegal; and the converse. The text does not spell out the limits of "in consequence of", so whether a response is truly consequential is a question of fact in the case.
Section 64: financial aid
"No person shall knowingly spend or apply any money in direct furtherance or support of any illegal strike or lock-out." The elements:
| Element | Text |
|---|---|
| Who | "No person": not limited to workers or employers |
| Mental element | "knowingly" |
| Act | Spend or apply any money |
| Connection | "in direct furtherance or support" |
| Object | An illegal strike or lock-out |
The section is short, and its reach depends on the word "knowingly" and the nexus "direct furtherance or support". For a union, this bears on how strike funds are used; for trade union funds generally, see section 15. For an employer, it bears on funding an illegal lock-out. Section 86(16) makes it an offence: a person who knowingly spends or applies money in direct furtherance or support of an illegal strike or lock-out is punishable with fine of not less than ten thousand rupees and up to fifty thousand rupees, or imprisonment up to one month, or both.
Consequences and practice
Section 86 also penalises the illegal action itself. A worker who commences, continues or acts in furtherance of an illegal strike faces a fine of one thousand to ten thousand rupees, or imprisonment up to one month, or both (s.86(13)). An employer doing the same for an illegal lock-out faces a fine of fifty thousand to one lakh rupees, or imprisonment up to one month, or both (s.86(14)). Instigating or inciting others, or otherwise acting in furtherance, carries a fine of ten thousand to fifty thousand rupees, or imprisonment up to one month, or both (s.86(15)). Wages for the strike period, dismissal and similar questions are not dealt with in ss.63 and 64. Our labour law compliance team can help you assess a strike notice or a planned lock-out against s.62 and s.63 before action is taken. For the old-law background see Strikes: legal and illegal under sections 22-24.
The Central Rules, 2026 (G.S.R. 342(E), 8 May 2026), in the text reviewed, add no separate rule on s.63 or s.64; rules 25 and 26 set notice forms for Central-sphere establishments. Where the State Government is the appropriate Government, State rules apply.
Need help checking a strike or lock-out?
A single missed date can turn a notice into an illegal strike. Our labour law compliance team can help you test a notice or a response against the Code before it is acted on.
Key takeaways
- A strike or lock-out is illegal if commenced or declared against s.62, or continued against a s.42(7) order (s.63(1)).
- Continuing an existing action after filing or reference is not illegal if it was lawful at its start (s.63(2)).
- A retaliatory lock-out or strike in consequence of an illegal one is not illegal (s.63(3)).
- Knowingly spending money in direct furtherance or support of an illegal strike or lock-out is prohibited (s.64).
Read next
- Section 62: prohibition of strikes and lock-outs
- Section 42: voluntary reference of disputes to arbitration
- Section 65-66: application of chapter and continuous service
- Strikes: legal and illegal under sections 22-24
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.