Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Orissa & Ors vs Sadhu Charan Pradhan on 17 September, 1997

Union Of India (Uoi), Rep. By The ... vs E. Kesavan on 1 March, 2003

Thus while the above stated legal position in the case of 'STATE OF ORISSA versus ADWAIT CHARAN MOHANTY AND OTHERS' reported in 1995 SCC (L&S) 522 has been clarified and reiterated in the subsequent decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERS versus ARNAB KUMAR DUTTA), (ALL ORISSA ELECTRICAL WORKERS' UNION versus STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERS), and (STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS versus SADHU CHARAN PRADHAN), the counsel for the respondent sought reliance upon the Judgments rendered in 1991 SCC (L&S) 728 (PRITIPAL SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA), 1992 SCC (L&S) 990 (CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION, through the Chief Engineer & Others -Vs.- MEHAR SINGH AND ANOTHER), and 1993 SCC (L&S) 176 (CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ANOTHER versus AJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER), to contend that inasmuch as the later decisions were rendered on FR 56(b) itself as against the former cases where only Rule 71(a) of the Orissa Code came to be interpreted, the later judgments should be followed.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - F M Kalifulla - Full Document

Union Of India vs E.Kesavan on 3 April, 2003

Thus while the above stated legal position in the case of 'STATE OF ORISSA versus ADWAIT CHARAN MOHANTY AND OTHERS' reported in 1995 SCC (L&S) 522 has been clarified and reiterated in the subsequent decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1996 (7) SCC 203 (STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERS versus ARNAB KUMAR DUTTA), 1996(11) SCC 240 (ALL ORISSA ELECTRICAL WORKERS' UNION versus STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERS), and 1997 (7) SCC 754 (STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS versus SADHU CHARAN PRADHAN), the counsel for the respondent sought reliance upon the Judgments rendered in 1991 SCC (L&S) 728 ( PRITIPAL SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA), 1992 SCC (L&S) 990 (CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION, through the Chief Engineer & Others -Vs.- MEHAR SINGH AND ANOTHER), and 1993 SCC (L&S) 176 (CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ANOTHER versus AJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER), to contend that inasmuch as the later decisions were rendered on FR 56(b) itself as against the former cases where only Rule 71(a) of the Orissa Code came to be interpreted, the later judgments should be followed.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - F M Kalifulla - Full Document

Shri Cipriano Agnelo Ribeiro vs The Directorate Of Health Services, ... on 29 September, 1998

8. Learned Government Advocate Shri Thaly has strenuously argued before us, after placing reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in State of Orissa v. Adwait Charan Mohanty (supra) and State of Orissa v. Sadhu Charan Pradhan (supra) that the Directorate of Health Services cannot be held to be either an industrial or work charged establishment and the definition of 'industry' as contained in section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot be imported in F.R, 56 to hold that it is an industrial or work-charged establishment.
Bombay High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - R K Batta - Full Document
1