Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)
Tamil Nadu Handicrafts Development ... vs Inspector Of Factories, Range No. Ii, ... on 26 October, 1999 cites

Metal Powder Co. Ltd., Tirumangalam And ... vs The State Of Tamil Nadu And Anr. on 5 February, 1985

By pointing out the above conclusion, Mr.N. Jothi would contend that in the absence of any enquiry and a speaking order, the impugned order cannot be sustained. I am unable to accept the said contention for the very same reasons mentioned above. It is clear that petitioner was given an opportunity to participate in the enquiry and as a matter of fact, a representative of the petitioner Corporation also participated in the enquiry. According to the petitioner, if the workmen concerned are entitled to be made permanent, nothing prevented them from placing relevant materials before the authority. I have already mentioned the statutory obligation on the part of every employer to maintain Register of workmen in Form I. The Inspector is authorised to verify the Registers and take appropriate decision. Here again, I hold that the first respondent has fully complied with and followed the law laid down by Their Lordships in the Division Bench decision referred to above.
Madras High Court Cites 59 - Cited by 48 - Full Document

State Bank Of Patiala & Ors vs S.K.Sharma on 27 March, 1996

13. Miss. Vaigai, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, by relying a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala v. S.K. Sharma, , would contend that there is no violation of principles of natural justice in the order impugned as claimed by the petitioner. In that decision, Their Lordships have observed that "the interests of justice equally demand that the guilty should be punished and that technicalities and irregularities which do not occasion failure of justice are not allowed to defeat the ends of justice. Principles of natural justice are but the means to achieve the ends of justice. They cannot be perverted to achieve the very opposite end. That would be a counter productive exercise," After holding so, Their Lordships have summarised the principles. Among the principles, principle No.3 in para 33 is relevant:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 1234 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1