Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (0.92 seconds)
Jamnagar Municipal Corporation vs Babubhai Hirabhai on 30 June, 2017 cites

Hindustan Steel Works Construction ... vs Hindustan Steel Works Construction ... on 10 February, 1995

18.   In   the   writ   petition   the   respondent   was   mainly  concerned   with   receiving   wages   in   accordance   with   the  Minimum Wages Act  and for inclusion of the period spent  in   Conciliation   Proceedings   for   the   calculation   of  financial benefits. The High Court without examining the  factual   situation,   and   placing   reliance   on   the   judgment  in  M/s.   14   Hindustan   Tin   Works   Pvt.   Ltd.   vs.   The  Employees of M/s. Hindustan Tin Works Pvt. Ltd. and ors .  held that the normal rule of full back wages ought to be  followed in this case. We are of the considered opinion  that   such   a   conclusion   could   have   been   reached   by   the  High Court only after recording cogent reasons in support  thereof. Especially since  the award of the Labour  Court  was   being   modified.   The   Labour   Court   exercising   its  discretionary   jurisdiction   concluded   that   it   was   not   a  fit case for the grant of back wages.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 337 - B P Reddy - Full Document

General Manager, Haryana Roadways vs Rudhan Singh on 14 July, 2005

In   G.M.   Haryana   Roadways   v.   Rudhan   Singh  ,  [2005] 5 SCC 591, this Court held that there is no  rule of thumb that in each and every case, where a  finding   is   recorded   by   Court   or   Tribunal   that   the  order of termination of service was illegal that an  employee is entitled to full back wages. A host of  Page 29 of 36 HC-NIC Page 29 of 36 Created On Sun Aug 20 09:44:07 IST 2017 C/SCA/9678/2010 JUDGMENT factors   must   be   taken   into   account.   The   Court  stated:
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 543 - G P Mathur - Full Document

Haryana Urban Development Authority vs Om Pal on 10 April, 2007

19. In Haryana Urban Development Authority v. Om Pal  it is stated that: (SCC p. 745, para 7) "7.... It is  now   also   well   settled   that   despite   a   wide  discretionary   power   conferred   upon   the   Industrial  Courts   under  Section   11A    of   the   1947   Act,   the  relief of reinstatement with full back wages should  not be granted automatically only   because it would  be lawful to do so. Grant of relief would depend on  the fact situation  obtaining  in each case. It will  depend  upon several factors,  one of which  would  be  as to whether the recruitment was effected in terms  of the statutory provisions operating in the field,  if any."
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 146 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Western India Match Co. Ltd. vs The Third Industrial Tribunal, West ... on 16 November, 1977

20.   In   deciding   the   question,   as   to   whether   the  employee should be recompensed with full back wages  and other benefits until the date of reinstatement,  the   tribunals   and   the   courts   have   to   be   realistic  albeit   the   ordinary   rule   of   full   back   wages   on  reinstatement. (Western India Match Co. Ltd. v. Industrial Tribunal )"
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 36 - Full Document

Central Bank Of India vs S.Satyam & Ors on 31 July, 1996

As observed by Hon'ble Apex Court in para 9 of  the decision in the case of Central Bank of India v.  S. Satyam & Ors. [(1996) 5 SCC 419], the Section 25G  borrows and applies the concept of "last come, first  go" but the term "retrenchment" is not and cannot be  restricted only to the cases covered by Section 25F.  In the said decision, Apex Court has observed, inter  alia, that:­ "9. The plain language of  Section 25­H  speaks  only of re­ employment of 'retrenched workmen'.  The   ordinary   meaning   of   the   expression  'retrenched   workmen   must   relate   to   the   wide  meaning   of   'retrenchment'   given   in   Section  2(oo).   Section   25­F   also   uses   the   word  'retrenchment' but qualifies it by use of the  further   words   'workman'   who   has   been   in  continuous service for not less than one year'.  Thus,   Section   25­F   does   not   restrict   the  meaning   of   retrenchment   but   qualifies   the  category of retrenched workmen covered therein  by  use  of  the  further  words  workman.  Who  has  Page 14 of 36 HC-NIC Page 14 of 36 Created On Sun Aug 20 09:44:07 IST 2017 C/SCA/9678/2010 JUDGMENT been   in   continuous   service   for   not   less   than   one year. It is clear that Section 25­F applies   to   the   retrenched   workman   who   has   been   in  continuous service for not less: one year and  not to any workman who has bean in continuous  service for less than one year; and it does not  restrict or curtail the meaning of retrenchment  merely   because   the   provision   therein   is   made   only for the retrenchment of a workman who has  been in continuous service for not less the one   year. Chapter V­A deals with all retrenchments  while Section 25­F is confined only to the mode   of   retrenchment   of   workmen   in   continuous  service for not less than one year. Section 25­ G prescribes the principle for retrenchment and  applies ordinarily the principle of 'last come  first so' which is not confined only to workmen   who   have   been   in   continuous   service   for   not  less than one year, covered by Section 25­F." Under   the   circumstances,   in   present   case,   when  breach of Section 25G is established, it translates  into   fact­situation,   and   leads   the   Court   to   the  conclusion   that   the   petitioner's   action   viz.  terminating the respondent's service while retaining  juniors   to   him,   is   illegal   and   in   violation   of  statutory provision.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 164 - J S Verma - Full Document
1   2 3 Next