Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.21 seconds)Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Gauri Shankar & Ors. on 31 August, 1999
6. We may also mention that in MCD v. Gauri Shankar (supra), the
Tribunal had held that the workman was entitled to regularization from the
date of his appointment, i.e. 25.10.1983. The stand of the MCD before this
Court was that the workman Gauri Shankar was entitled for regularization
from 1.4.1989 as his turn for regularization came only in April, 1989. This
stand of the MCD was accepted by Sikri, J. and a direction was given to the
MCD to regularize the services of the workman Gauri Shankar from 1.4.1989.
In the present case, the MCD has not cared to produce on record the
seniority list or the other material relating to regularization of Malis/Beldars
in its establishment and it is not clear as to when the turn of late Sh. Dil Bagh
came for regularization. We presume that in view of the fact that Gauri
Shankar's services came to be regularized in April, 1989, ordinarily the
services of the workman in the present case would have been regularized by
April, 1990 since Gauri Shankar's appointment was one year prior to Dil
[LPA 173/2009] Page 4 of 12
Bagh.
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 201 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Jeet Singh And Ors. vs M.C.D. And Ors. on 8 September, 1986
The
order passed by a two-Judges bench in Jeet Singh's case (supra) is
reproduced below:
Section 2 in The Maharashtra Prohibition Act [Entire Act]
1