Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.30 seconds)
Documents citing Workman, Represented By The General ... vs General Manager, India Cements Limited ... on 7 August, 1998

C.Prabhakaran vs The Chairman on 15 July, 2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 26/38 W.P.Nos.8685 and 8275/2018 (49)As has been rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, we must see the situation or the necessity which triggered the parties to go for a 18[1] Settlement under the Industrial Disputes Act. (50)In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon two decisions as referred to above, i.e., [a] the decision reported in 1999 [2] LLJ 1 in the matter of Workman rep.by the General Secretary, India Cements Employees' Union, Sankari West Vs. General Manager, India Cements Limited, Sankari West and Another, where he relies on the following paragraph:-
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - R S Kumar - Full Document

Madhusudhan vs The Management on 24 January, 2023

In the case of Workman represented by General Secretary (supra), A Division Bench of Madras High Court was dealing with a case where the services of workman was not absorbed due to ill health of the said workman. The Labourt Court had set aside the order of the management and ordered reinstatement with full back wages which was interfered with by the learned Single Judge. The Division Bench set aside the order of learned Single Judge and affirmed the order of the Labour Court by modifying the back wages to 50%.
Karnataka High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kumaresan N. vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court And ... on 31 October, 2000

10. Learned counsel then referred to a judgment in Workmen represented by the General Secretary, India Cements Employees' Union v. General Manager, India Cements-Ltd., 1999-II-LLJ-l (Mad-DB), for the proposition that the termination on the ground of continued ill-health as has been done by the second respondent-management in this case, cannot be upheld. In this judgment, a Division Bench of this Court was concerned with a case of non-confirmation of an employee on the ground that he was suffering from certain physical defect which made him unfit for work and disentitled him for absorption. On a perusal of the said judgment, I find that there were variations in the certificate given by the doctor attached to the company's dispensary and the District Medical Officer and that the workman therein was not given proper opportunity to establish that the disease alleged to have been suffered by him was non-communicable and non-infectious one and which affected his right for absorption. It was, in those circumstances, the learned judges were of the view that the action of the management therein was vitiated. The facts involved in the said judgment is also not applicable to the facts of this case, where, the factum of illness is admitted and the petitioner's inability to perform his duties due to the said illness is also established by his own admission.
Madras High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 3 - F M Kalifulla - Full Document

The Depot Manager, Apsrtc, Kurnool ... vs Ediga Surya Chandra Goud, Anantapur ... on 9 December, 2019

3. The Tribunal, while dealing with the charges, observed that the petitioner was suffering from ill-health and taking advantage of the ill-health, the passengers showed old tickets to the checking officials, and the passengers were not examined in the enquiry. From the said fact, the Tribunal drew an inference that the non-examination of the passengers gives an impression that they could have produced old tickets to the checking officials to safeguard themselves from the imposition of fine. Based on the said opinion, the Tribunal held that the petitioner 3 failed to discharge his duty vigorously and gave room to the passengers to travel in the bus without proper ticket. The Tribunal also held that the punishment awarded by the respondent was excessive and deserves modification. The Tribunal considered the judgment in The General Secretary, India Cements Employees' Union, Sankari West vs. General Manager, India Cements, Limited, Sankari West1, wherein it was held that an important facet of right to life is the right to livelihood, because no person can live without the means of living, that is, means of livelihood.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - T Rajani - Full Document

General Manager vs Union Of India & Anr on 29 July, 2025

01. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal being, MA No. 9900009/2011, was preferred by the General Manager, Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC), Shimla against an award dated 25.03.2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), Kathua in a claim petition on file No. 48/CP titled - "Union of India vs General Manager HRTC & Anr." wherein compensation of an amount of Rs. 2,18,874/- alongwith interest from the date of filing of the claim petition came to be granted in favour of the claimant - Union of India.
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bharti - Full Document
1