Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.61 seconds)The Bombay University Act, 1974
Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank ... vs Ram Gopal Sharma & Ors on 17 January, 2002
11. Shri Sangeet, therefore, submits that if the Approval Applications are
held to be untenable in law, the Industrial Court should have rejected the
Approval Applications and as a consequence of which, the petitioner /
workmen would have been deemed to be in employment in the light of the
judgment of the Apex Court (Five Judges' Bench) in the case of Jaipur Zilla
(Supra). He, therefore, submits that these petitions be allowed and the
impugned judgments of the Tribunal be quashed and set aside. It be
concluded that the petitioners are continued in employment with effect
from the respective date of termination with all incidental and
consequential service benefits.
The Chief Traffic Manager vs Sri M Narayana Reddy on 12 March, 2013
(f) Chief Traffic Manager Vs. M. Narayana Reddy,
2013 LLR 642,
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2015 23:57:07 :::
WP/9343/2015/Group
R Rangaswamy vs The Vice Chairman & Managing Director on 12 February, 2014
(h) R. Rangaswamy Vs. Vice-Chairman and Managing Director,
2014 (142) FLR 595,
Ashok Bhattacharjee vs State Of Assam &Amp Anr on 20 April, 2015
(i) Ashok Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Assam
2013 (137) FLR 600,
Glaxo Laboratories vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court ... on 6 October, 1983
(l) M/s Glaxo Laboratories Vs. The Presiding Officer
1983 (47) FLR 508.