Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.42 seconds)Article 310 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 311 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961
State Of U.P vs Jai Bir Singh on 5 May, 2005
NC: 2023:KHC-K:8426-DB
CCC No. 200118 of 2022
C/W WA No. 200122 of 2015
judgments which were noticed in Jai Bir Singh's case
(supra), there cannot be any doubt that the appellant
authority being established under the provisions of the
Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act and the Rules
thereunder with a specific objective of implementing the
provisions contained in the Act in the matter of Town and
Country Planning, the appellant does not fall within the
definition of the 'Industry' as defined under Section 2(j) of
the Act.
Secretary, Madras Gymkhana Club ... vs Management Of The Gymkhana Club on 3 October, 1967
In Jai Bir Singh's case (supra), their lordships
also noticed the observation in Secretary, Madras
Gymkhana Club Employees' Union vs. Gymkhana
Club reported in (1968) 1 SCR 742 as follows: "before
the work engaged it can be described as an industry, it
must bear the definite character of `trade' or `business' or
`manufacture' or 'calling' or must be capable of being
described as an undertaking resulting in material goods or
material services''.
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
12. The said decision was rendered in the year
2006. On the admitted facts we find that the respondent
claims to have served the appellant authority for a period
of two years. The eligibility for seeking regularisation even
in terms of Umadevi's case (supra) is that a person
should have completed 10 years of services prior to the
decision rendered in Umadevi's case (supra).
1