Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 41 (0.97 seconds)
Documents citing Kamani Metals & Alloys Ltd vs Their Workmen on 24 January, 1967

The Management Of vs The Presiding Officer on 23 November, 2009

26. It was also held in that case that while fixing fair wages, the capacity of the industry to bear the burden is a relevant factor. Regarding the comparison of units in deciding wages, it was held that care must be taken that differently placed units are not taken as guidance while distinguishing the differences. The relevant portion of the judgment is as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 49 - Cited by 0 - P Jyothimani - Full Document

Skylark vs Regional on 14 June, 2012

In view of the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Kamani Metals and Alloys Ltd. v. The Workmen (supra) and People's Union for Democratic Rights and others v. Union of India and others (supra) the above-quoted judgments, the submission made by the learned advocate for the petitioner regarding late receipt of payments from its clients as a reason for not paying the minimum wage, cannot be sustained.
Gujarat High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A Kumari - Full Document

Transport Corporation Of India vs Maharashtra Rajya Mathadi Transport ... on 16 April, 2003

In Kamani Metals and Alloys Ltd. v. Their Workmen, (supra), the Supreme Court, while rejecting the submission of the employer that there was no change in circumstances justifying a revision of pay-scales, dearness allowance etc., observed that judicial notice must be taken of the fact that commodity prices have gone high, general level of wages has gone up and in some industries, there have been two or three revisions already and in some others, Wage Boards have been appointed while adjudicating a wage reference. It is further observed that if inspite of these factors there has been no upward revision in the company, the demand would be justified. Therefore, it is obvious that while adjudicating the reference, the Tribunal was required to keep certain principles which the Supreme Court has laid down in the forefront and to consider whether upward revision in wages must be given if the circumstances so warrant. The Supreme Court has held in a number of cases that the Industrial Tribunal must strive to see that workers are paid fair wages and not merely the minimum wages. An industrial adjudication by an award cannot be assailed because some other person would have given a different award or that elaborate reasons have not been given. We have considered the comparative charts furnished by both the parties carefully and on the whole, we are satisfied that the scales of wages as fixed by these awards are not so high, as to merit interference.
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - A P Shah - Full Document

West Bengal State Electricity ... vs West Bengal State Electricity Board ... on 17 September, 2021

In this regard reliance is placed on Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Workmen & Anr., reported in AIR 1969 SC 360, Precision Bearings India Ltd. v. Baroda Mazdoor Sabha & Anr., reported in 1978 (1) SCC 235, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. Tneb-Thozhilalar Aykkiya Sangam reported in 2019 (15) SCC 235, Workmen of Gujarat Electricity Board, Baroda v. The Gujarat Electricity Board, Baroda, reported in 1969 (1) SCC 266, Officers & Supervisors of I.D.P.L v. Chairman & M.D. I. D. P.L & Ors., reported in 2003 (6) SCC 490, Kamani Metals & Alloys Ltd. v. Workmen, reported in AIR 1967 SC 1175, Mihiai Lal Passi vs. C.E.S.C. Ltd. & Ors., reported in 2003 (3) CHN 357.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - S Sen - Full Document

The State Of Tripura vs Dr. Parimal Kanti Chakraborty on 21 September, 2022

24. The Supreme Court in Bengal Chemical & Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Workmen, (1969) 2 SCR 113 after referring to Kamani Metals & Alloys Ltd. v. Workmen, (1967) 2 SCR 463 has laid down that one-hundred per cent neutralisation is not advisable as it will lead to inflation and therefore, dearness allowance is often a little less than one-hundred per cent neutralisation.
Tripura High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chandan Metal Products (Pvt.) Limited vs Engineering Kamdar Union, Baroda And ... on 29 January, 1975

After referring to this observation in the report of the Committee on far wages and while formulating the principles set out in paragraph 73, it has in terms been held that the capacity of the industry to pay should be gauged on an industry-cum-region basis after taking a fair cross-section of that industry. This has been confirmed over and over again in Kamani Metals & Alloys Ltd. v. Workmen, A.I.R. 1967 S.C. 1975 J. P. Industries v. Workmen, [1973-I L.L.J. 1]; A.I.R. 1972 S.C. 605 and Kirlampudi Sugar Mills v. Industrial Tribunal (1973) 3 S.C.C. 626. Therefore, it is now well-established that while considering the question of capacity of the industry to pay, the industry-cum-region formula has to be kept in view and for each region a fair cross-section of the industry in that region should be taken into consideration. A faint attempt was made by Mr. Nanavati to urge that even where the Wage Board has computed wage structure on the industry-cum-region basis after taking fair cross-section of the industry in various regions, it would still be open for an individual unit to content that it cannot bear the burden that may be cast upon it if the recommendations in respect of the revised wages are to be enforced.
Gujarat High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - D A Desai - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next