Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.24 seconds)The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Sr.Suptd.Telegraph(Traffic)Bhopal vs Santosh Kumar Seal And Ors on 26 April, 2010
In para No.9 it was also held that: in Senior
Superintended, Telegraph (Traffic) Bhopal V. Santosh
Kumar Seal and Other, 2010 (1250 FLR 736 (SC): 2010
ID Tarif Singh Nagar Vs. M/s. Hawk View Securitas, 9/14
LLR 677( SC), it has been held that " if daily wagers had
worked for 2 or 3 years and their services were terminated
without payment of retrenchment compensation then
consolidated damages should be awarded to them." It has
also been held that "daily wager does not hold a post and
can not be equated with permanent employee."
Incharge Officer And Anr vs Shankar Shetty on 31 August, 2010
This view
has been reiterated in Incharge Officer v. Shankar
Shetty, 2010 (124) FLR 700 (SC): 2010 LLR 1137 (SC).
Standard Chartered Bank vs Vandana Joshi And Another on 17 December, 2009
In case of Standard Chartered Bank v. Vandana Joshi and
another, 2010-II-LLJ-409 (Bom) it was held that:
The Manager, Reserve Bank Of India vs S. Mani And Ors. on 25 June, 2002
I.C. 398 and
Reserve Bank of India Vs. S. Mani & Ors. 2005 IV AD
(S.C.)71 = 5 SCC 100 "22 it was held by the Apex court
that " it is only if the initial burden of proof, which was on
the workman, was discharged to some extent, that a
finding can be returned in respect of the defence of the
ID Tarif Singh Nagar Vs. M/s. Hawk View Securitas, 11/14
management. Furthermore, a plea having been set up by
the workman, the initial burden of proof was on the
workman to show that he had been employed by the
petitioner in the claim capacity on the stated terms."
Section 2A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Shri Raj Narain & Anr on 7 November, 1975
24. In Automobile Assoc. Upper India (M/S.) Vs. The P.O.
Labour Court II & Anr. 2006 VI AD (DELHI) 180 and in case
Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain cited as S. 114 (g) of
Evidence Act must place some evidence in support of his case, this
court has observed that:
Range Forest Officer vs S.T. Hadimani on 15 February, 2002
20. The Honble Supreme Court in Range Forest Officer V.
S.T. Hadimani, 2002 (93) FLR 179 (SC) has held that:
1