Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 32 (0.46 seconds)Section 2 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Chief Conservator Of Forests And ... vs Jagannath Maruti Kondhare, Etc. Etc. on 6 December, 1995
48. Considering the argument of the management that regularisation of
services of the respondent would create heavy burden upon it, the learned
Tribunal held that the management, being the employer, is duty bound to
pay the appropriate remuneration to the persons employed by it and the right
to receive appropriate remuneration in lieu of their service is a constitutional
20
(2014)7SCC 190
21 (1950) LLJ 921 Supreme Court
22 (2009)8 SCC Page 556
23 Civil Appeal No. 6327 of 2014
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14839/2023
Digitally Signed By:SARIKA
BHAMOO VERMA
Page 25 of 33
Signing Date:05.06.2024
19:02:43
right of a citizen. Further, relying upon the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme
Court in Chief Conservator of Forests & Anr. Vs. Jagannath Maruti
Kondhare & Ors.24 the learned Tribunal held that financial strain on the
state exchequer cannot be a ground for consideration when the workmen
have been held entitled to permanency, or for higher pay.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Bharat Bank Ltd., Delhi vs Employees Of The Bharat Bank ... on 26 May, 1950
Moreover, the reliance
of the learned Tribunal on the judgment of Bharat Bank Ltd. (Supra) is also
misplaced as the aforesaid judgment does not lay down that the Labour
Court can travel beyond the terms of reference and adjudicate upon issues
which have not been referred to it by the appropriate government.
J.H. Jadhav vs M/S. Forbes Gokak Ltd on 11 February, 2005
39. The learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the
contention of the petition by placing reliance upon the decision of the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the matter of J.H Jhadav vs. Forbes Gokak
Ltd.19to argue that no particular form has been prescribed to effect an
espousal, and the same depends upon and varies with the facts of each case.
Further, it was argued that as the union has presented the resolution passed
by it in order to raise an industrial dispute in the favour of the workmen, the
same will be enough to give effect to the espousal.
Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015
27. It is submitted that the averment made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner entity that the impugned Award is defective and is against the
ratio of the judgement passed in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma
Devi (Supra) is untenable as the facts and circumstances of the instant
matter are different and also that the true intent of Uma Devi (Supra) was
not to give a free hand to the employer to commit unfair labour practices
against the workmen.
Maharashtra State Road Trans.Corp. ... vs Casteribe Rajya P. Karmchari ... on 28 August, 2009
After placing reliance upon the
observations of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahrashtra State
Road Transport and Another vs. Casteribe Rajya Parivahan Karamchari
Sangathan22 and in the case of Shri Ajay Pal Singh vs. Haryana
23
Warehousing Corporation the learned Tribunal observed that the
contention of the management that the judgment of Uma Devi (Supra) is
applicable to the present case, is misplaced in law since the same is not
applicable upon the industrial worker.
Ajay Pal Singh vs Haryana Warehousing Corp. on 9 July, 2014
After placing reliance upon the
observations of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahrashtra State
Road Transport and Another vs. Casteribe Rajya Parivahan Karamchari
Sangathan22 and in the case of Shri Ajay Pal Singh vs. Haryana
23
Warehousing Corporation the learned Tribunal observed that the
contention of the management that the judgment of Uma Devi (Supra) is
applicable to the present case, is misplaced in law since the same is not
applicable upon the industrial worker.