Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)
Haralal Sadasheorao Bande And Ors. vs State Industrial Court, Nagpur And Anr. on 23 September, 1965 cites

Andheri Marol Kurla Bus Service& ... vs The State Of Bombay on 21 April, 1959

In. A. M. K. Bus Service v. State of Bombay, interpretation of S. 12(6) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (Central) came in for consideration. Section 12 of the Act prescribes the duties of officers and under sub-section (6) of Conciliation Officer is required to make a report under this section within 14 days of the commencement of the conciliation proceedings, or even within shorter time if a shorter time is fixed by the appropriate Government. Under S. 33 of the same Act no employer can in regard to any matter connected with the dispute alter to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such dispute the conditions of work during the pendency of any proceeding before the conciliation officer.. The question that arose in the case was whether a conciliation proceeding could be said to be pending when Conciliator did not submit a report within the period of 14 days of the commencement of the conciliation proceedings so as to give immunity to an employer who altered the conditions of service of workmen after period of 14 days. Their Lordship held in paragraph 5 that there was no doubt that S. 12 contemplates that the report should be made and the proceedings closed within a fortnight, and if proceedings are not closed but are carried on, or if the Conciliation Officer does not make his report within 14 days he may be guilty of the breach of duty, but the law the proceedings do not automatically come to an end but only terminate under S. 20 (2) (b) of the Act which applies to all proceedings.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 13 - J L Kapur - Full Document
1