Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 1155 (1.38 seconds)
Documents citing A. Umarani vs Registrar, Cooperative Societies And ... on 28 July, 2004

Sunil S/O Eknath Patil Alias Chaudhary vs The State Of Maharashtra (Notice To Be ... on 31 March, 2008

9. Learned A.G.P. has placed reliance upon the judgment in the matter of A. Umrani v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Ors. AIR 2004 SC 4504. Having gone through the judgment, we are of a considered view that the ratio laid down in the said judgment has no application to the issue at hands. The judgment mainly lays down that the regularisation is not and cannot be mode of recruitment by any State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. Regularisation further more cannot give permanence to an employee whose services are adhoc in nature.
Bombay High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - N V Dabholkar - Full Document

The Management vs The Inspector Of Labour

Since the respondents 2 to 19 therein sought enforcement of statutory right and in view of the specific act applicable to the State https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 16/23 W.P(MD)No.9323 of 2014 of Tamil Nadu, the Judgments relied in that case reported in 2001 (1) LLJ 187 [Ruth Soren Vs. Managing Committee, East I.S.S.D.A and others] and the Judgment reported in 2004 (7) SCC 112 [A.Umarani Vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies] were not applicable to the facts of the case."
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - G Chandrasekharan - Full Document

Z.376 vs The Presiding Officer on 13 September, 2019

"13. ........In view of such finding of Supreme Court in A.Umarani v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies (supra), the observations, findings and directions given by Division Bench of this Court in L.Justine v. Registrar of Co-op Societies, Chennai (supra) at paragraph 19(i), last portion of paragraph 19(v) and the finding with regard to regularisation of service of employees recruited prior to 12.03.2001, stand overruled.
Madras High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S M Subramaniam - Full Document

The Management vs The Inspector Of Labour

Since the respondents 2 to 19 therein sought enforcement of statutory right and in view of the specific act applicable to the State of Tamil Nadu, the Judgments relied in that case reported in 2001 (1) LLJ 187 [Ruth Soren Vs. Managing Committee, East I.S.S.D.A and others] and the Judgment reported in 2004 (7) SCC 112 [A.Umarani Vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies] were not applicable to the facts of the case".
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - G Chandrasekharan - Full Document

The Management vs The Inspector Of Labour

Since the respondents 2 to 19 therein sought enforcement of statutory right and in view of the specific act applicable to the State https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 16/23 W.P(MD)No.9319 of 2014 of Tamil Nadu, the Judgments relied in that case reported in 2001 (1) LLJ 187 [Ruth Soren Vs. Managing Committee, East I.S.S.D.A and others] and the Judgment reported in 2004 (7) SCC 112 [A.Umarani Vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies] were not applicable to the facts of the case".
Madras High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - G Chandrasekharan - Full Document

Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Workman, Indian Drugs & ... on 16 November, 2006

Admittedly, the employees in question in Court had not been appointed by following the regular procedure, and instead they had been appointed only due to the pressure and agitation of the union and on compassionate ground. There were not even vacancies on which they could be appointed. As held in A. Umarani vs. Registrar, Cooperative Societies & Ors. 2004(7) SCC 112, such employees cannot be regularized as regularization is not a mode of recruitment.
Supreme Court of India Cites 43 - Cited by 613 - M Katju - Full Document

Madurai Corporation vs The Inspector Of Labour on 22 April, 2022

35. The next decision cited by Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd., s. Dan Bahadur Singh and others reported in (2007) 6 SCC 207, is also one rendered with reference to the provisions of service law where it Page 50/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A(MD)Nos.1163 and 1164 of 2016 and W.P(MD)Nos.20438 and 20442 of 2017 was held that a person cannot claim permanency in the absence of availability of the posts. We, therefore, do not think that this judgment could be of any help to further the cause of the Corporation. Needless to point out that both in A.Umarani vs. Registrar, Co-operative Societies and others reported in (2004) 7 SCC 112 and State of Karnataka and others vs. Umadevi and others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has decried appointment of a person on temporary basis to regular posts in public employment. This Court has time and again held that those two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will not put fetters on the applicability of the Act 46 of 1981 on the workers who are appointed by an industrial establishment on a temporary basis.
Madras High Court Cites 51 - Cited by 0 - R Subramanian - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next