Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.40 seconds)
Jaswant Singh Gill vs M/S. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors on 10 November, 2006 cites

Management Of Tournamulla Estate vs Workmen on 26 March, 1973

Reliance has been placed by Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1 on Management of Tournamulla Estate v. Workmen [1973 (3) SCR 762]. In that case, this Court was concerned with a scheme of gratuity. The scheme contained a provision which was in pari materia with Section 4(6)(b) of the Act. The said scheme was upheld stating:
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 51 - A N Grover - Full Document

Bharath Gold Mines Ltd. vs Reg. Labour Commissioner (Central) And ... on 4 July, 1986

Reliance has also been placed upon a decision of Karnataka High Court in M/s. Bharath Gold Mines Ltd. v. The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Bangalore and others [1986 Lab. I.C. 1976]. In that case it was held that before the amount of gratuity can be directed to be forfeited, an opportunity of hearing must be given. The said decision may not have any application to the fact of the present case as opportunity of hearing was given both to the employer as also the employee by the authority.
Karnataka High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

D.V. Kapoor vs Union Of India And Ors on 7 August, 1990

Reliance placed by Mr. Mukherjee on a decision of this Court in D.V. Kapoor v. Union of India and Others [(1990) 4 SCC 314] is misplaced. Therein having regard to the provisions of the Civil Services and Conduct Rules, it was held that a departmental proceeding can be continued even after allowing the delinquent employee to voluntarily retire. However, therein the rules provided for withholding or withdrawing pension permanently. In that case itself, it was opined:
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 185 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1   2 Next