Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.29 seconds)
Kerala Plantation Workers ... vs Union Of India on 25 February, 2009 cites

Rattan Arya Etc. Etc vs State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr on 16 April, 1986

10. It is true, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court cannot direct the respondents to legislate on a particular subject, in view of the settled law, as declared by the Apex Court in 1982(1) SCC 271. At the same time, this Court need not be shy to declare the resultant position as totally unjustified or at least 'non-workable' in view of the admitted facts and circumstances as on date, with regard to the wage ceiling. Even though Section 2(k)(ii) was very much constitutionally valid at the time of inception in 1951 and of course, till 1985 (when the process for amendment to enhance the wage ceiling was commenced as stated in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent) or even till O.P. Nos.35432 and 37167 of 2001 14 1995 when the minimum wage payable was yet to cross the maximum ceiling provided under Section 2(k)(ii), the issue took a different turn at least from 1995 onwards, when the minimum wages notified by the appropriate Government crossed the maximum ceiling, thereby taking the beneficiaries under the Statute outside the purview and scope of the Act. There is considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that immediate interference of the Court is very much essential to save the deserving but abandoned lots; particularly when they are quite unable to get the benefits under other relevant enactments such as ESI, etc. This is more so, in view of the observations made by the Apex Court in Rattan Arya and Others v. State of Tamil Nadu and another [1986(3) SCC 385] (paragraph 4) though in a different context.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 104 - O C Reddy - Full Document

State Of Kerala & Ors vs Unni & Anr on 1 December, 2006

(k)(ii) of the Act, which has resulted in substantial injustice negating the intention of the original law making authority, who took pains to bring about the relevant enactment as a welfare measure. Exclusion of the workers included in the Plantation sector, on the basis of an obsolete stipulation as to the ceiling on maximum wages does not stand the test of law and time and is not in consonance with the directive principles as envisaged under the Constitution of India. This Court finds support from the decision rendered by the Apex Court in State of Kerala vs. Unni (2007(1) KLT 151) where it has been observed in paragraph No. 33 as follows;
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 208 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1