Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.42 seconds)

Regional Authority, Dena Bank & Anr vs Ghanshyam on 8 May, 2001

Before Section 17B was introduced there was no bar for Courts for awarding wages. Of course the workmen had no right to claim it, this section recognizes such a right. To construe it in a manner detrimental to workmen would be to defeat its object. This further fortifies the view that the wages to be granted in this Section can be from the date of the Award especially since the 'Objects' of the amendment clearly indicate/specify so. In Regional Authority, Dena Bank and Anr. v. Ghanshyam JT 2001 (Suppl.1) SC 229, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered its previous view in Dena Bank I (Supra) and observed that 'the workman should get the last drawn wages from the date of the Award till the challenge to the Award is finally decided....' On first principles, the Apex Court has held that Orders under Section 17B of the I.D. Act should commence with effect from the date of the Award, thus leaving no scope any longer for debate.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 135 - S S Quadri - Full Document

Dena Bank vs Kiritikumar T.Patel on 19 November, 1997

Before Section 17B was introduced there was no bar for Courts for awarding wages. Of course the workmen had no right to claim it, this section recognizes such a right. To construe it in a manner detrimental to workmen would be to defeat its object. This further fortifies the view that the wages to be granted in this Section can be from the date of the Award especially since the 'Objects' of the amendment clearly indicate/specify so. In Regional Authority, Dena Bank and Anr. v. Ghanshyam JT 2001 (Suppl.1) SC 229, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered its previous view in Dena Bank I (Supra) and observed that 'the workman should get the last drawn wages from the date of the Award till the challenge to the Award is finally decided....' On first principles, the Apex Court has held that Orders under Section 17B of the I.D. Act should commence with effect from the date of the Award, thus leaving no scope any longer for debate.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 206 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Rajinder Kumar Kindra vs Delhi Administration Through ... on 27 September, 1984

30. So far as the expression 'gainful employment in an establishment' is concerned, it has been held by the courts that the self-employment too is not employment in an establishment. This question fell for consideration before the Apex Court in entitled Rajinder Kumar Kundra v. Delhi Administration while considering the question relating to award of back wages, the court noticed thus:
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 357 - D A Desai - Full Document
1   2 Next