Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (2.70 seconds)Section 19 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Air India Statutory Corporation vs United Labour Union & Ors on 6 November, 1996
Reliance in this regard is placed on Air India Statutory
Corporation Vs. United Labour Union & Ors. 1997 (76) FLR 119. In view
of the notification, no contract labour was permissible. Once contract labour
stood abolished there was a direct contract between the labour and the
principal employer.
Section 3 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The State Of Bihar vs D. N. Ganguly & Others on 22 August, 1958
In State of Bihar Vs. D.N. Ganguly and Ors. AIR 1958 SC 1018 their
Lordships held that the Act does not expressly confer any power on the
appropriate Government to cancel or supersede a reference made under
Section 10(1) of the ID Act. There is no dispute to this proposition. Having
made a reference the Government cannot cancel or supersede a reference,
W.P.(C) 7993/2008 & conn. Matters Page 12 of 16
however it can certainly amend the reference. In the said case relied by the
Respondent, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court was dealing with the issue of
cancellation of the reference and termination of the proceedings and it is in
this context that it was held that the rule of construction enunciated by
Section 21 of the General Clauses Act in so far as it refers to the power of
rescinding or cancelling the original order cannot be invoked in respect of
the provisions of Section 10(1) of the ID Act. In the case in hand there is no
cancellation or rescinding of the terms of reference but modification thereof,
as is apparent from the corrigendum issued. It was reported:
Section 21 in The General Clauses Act, 1897 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Indian Tourism Development ... vs Delhi Administration And Ors. on 29 January, 1982
10. The full Bench of this Court in Indian Tourism Development
Corporation (supra) held that the jurisdiction the Labour Court/ Industrial
Tribunal in industrial disputes is limited to the points specifically referred for
its adjudication and the matters incidental thereto and it is not permissible to
go beyond the point of reference. An industrial adjudicator is not vested
with any inherent power or jurisdiction. It exercises such jurisdiction and
power only upon and under order of reference limited to its terms. It cannot
W.P.(C) 7993/2008 & conn. Matters Page 11 of 16
travel beyond the terms of reference except for ancillary matters. The issue
in the present case is not whether the Government was justified in issuing the
corrigendum because the issuance of the corrigendum has not been
challenged by the Respondent, but whether on receiving a corrigendum the
learned Trial Court was justified in proceeding with the first reference. On
the receipt of the revised reference by way of the corrigendum the learned
Trial Court grossly erred in holding that it had two reference. The earlier
reference stood revised by the corrigendum.