Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 40 (0.30 seconds)Section 51 in The Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 [Entire Act]
Maharashtra State Road Trans.Corp. ... vs Casteribe Rajya P. Karmchari ... on 28 August, 2009
36) It is often contended that the Constitution Bench Judgment in
Umadevi does not circumscribe powers of an industrial adjudicator in
___Page No.59 of 70___
8 August 2024
::: Uploaded on - 13/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 17/08/2024 07:24:40 :::
Megha group matter_fc.docx
granting regularization on completing 240 days of service even in State
instrumentalities. Very often reliance is placed on judgment of the Apex
Court in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs.
Casteribe Rajya Parivahan Karmchari Sanghatana 11 and Hari Nandan
Prasad V/s. Employer I/R to Management of FCI & Anr. 12 However, even
in Hari Nandan Prasad (supra), which is decided after considering the
judgment in MSRTC Vs. Casteribe it is held that the Industrial/Labour
Courts can direct regularization only if similarly placed workmen are
regularized or if there is any scheme formulated by the employer for
regularization. The Apex Court held in Hari Nandan Prasad as under:
The State Of Maharashtra And Another vs Pandurang Sitaram Jadhav on 31 July, 2008
It
is apparent that no inconsistency exists and cannot be worked out in
State of Maharashtra & Anr. Vs. Pandurang Sitaram Jadhav as also
Pune Municipal Corporation v. Dhananjay Prabhakar Gokhale (supra)
on one hand and Ballarpur Industries Limited Vs. Maharashtra Lok
Kamgar Sanghatana (supra) on the other hand. Status of employer,
nature of employment and inherent Constitutional limitation on
public employer or absence of such fetters on any private employer
or absolute freedom available to it to create post/s and recruit, are
some of the distinguishing features which prohibit this exercise.
The Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Section 67 in The Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 [Entire Act]
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
The Payment Of Wages Act, 1936
M/S Suman Forwarding Agency Pvt. Ltd. vs The Chief Patron/Vice ... on 16 September, 2019
13. We may also refer to Suman Forwarding Agency Pvt Ltd. Vs Chief
Patron/Vice President/General Secretary, Central Warehousing
Corporation Majdoor Union, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 10318 in which
Delhi High Court has passed series of orders directing the Central
Government to implement the directions in Jagjit Singh (supra) in
respect of all casual labourers and contract workers engaged by the
Central Government and PSUs. In Order dated 16th September 2019,
the Delhi High Court has reproduced various Office Memoranda
issued by the Central Government Ministries. Since various OM are
culled out in that order, we deem it appropriate to reproduce the order
at the cost of making this judgment lengthy. The Order reads thus:
Vinod Kumar And Ors. vs Union Of India . on 17 July, 2023
31) Before parting, a quick reference to the recent judgment of the
Apex Court in Vinod Kumar & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors . would be
necessary. The Apex Court had an occasion to once again visit the issue
of regularisation of service of government employees. The Apex Court
has dealt with case of Accounts Clerks in the office of Divisional
Regional Manager, who were appointed to ex-cadre posts after
conducting selection process involving written test and viva voce
interviews in pursuance of Notification dated 21 February 1991. After
putting in considerable period of service, the Appellants approached
Central Administrative Tribunal. Their original applications were
dismissed by the Tribunal holding that their appointments were
temporary and for specific scheme. After their Writ Petitions were
dismissed by the High Court, the Appellants approached the Supreme
Court. The Apex Court, after referring to its decision in Umadevi has
held in paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 as under: