cites: 1908404

1 - 10 of 13 (0.38 seconds)

Anand Regional Co. Op Oil S. Union Ltd vs Shaileshkumar Harshadbhai Shah on 8 August, 2006 cites

Management Of Heavy Engineering ... vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court And ... on 23 April, 1999

The ratio in Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. (supra) to which our attention was drawn by Mr. Nagewhwara Rao must be held to be confined to the fact of the said case. In that case the Respondent No. 2 was not only supervising the work of the sweeper, etc., he had also been counter-signing on the casual leave register.

Patna High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 17 - M Y Eqbal - Full Document

Ananda Bazar Patrika (P) Ltd. vs The Workmen on 7 February, 1969

The ingredients of a workman as deliberated upon in Ananda Bazar Patrika (supra) had not been taken into consideration therein. The ratio of the said decision, therefore, cannot be said to be attracted in the present case.

Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 38 - V Bhargava - Full Document

North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn vs Ashappa on 12 May, 2006

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 68 - S B Sinha - Full Document

State Of U.P vs Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava & Ors on 24 February, 2006

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 167 - S B Sinha - Full Document

A. Sudhakar vs Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr on 24 March, 2006

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 54 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Mahindra And Mahindra Ltd vs N.B. Narawade on 22 February, 2005

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 265 - Full Document

Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board vs Jagdish Chandra Sharma on 4 March, 2005

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 157 - P K Balasubramanyan - Full Document

Hombe Gowda Edn. Trust & Anr vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 16 December, 2005

It is now well-settled that the industrial courts do not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless there exists sufficient reasons therefor. [See North Eastern Karnataka R.T. Corpn. V. Ashappa, 2006 (6) SCALE 89 State of U.P. v. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 276, A. Sudhakar v. Post Master General, Hyderabad & Anr., JT. 2006 (4) SC 68, Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. N.B. Narawade, (2005) 3 SCC 135, M.P. Electricity Board v. Jagdish Chandra Sharma, (2005) 3 SCC 401, Hombe Gowda Educational Trust and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2006) 1 SCC 430, and Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet.

Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 163 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Chairman & M.D., Bharat Pet. Corpn. Ltd. ... vs T.K. Raju on 24 February, 2006

Corpn. Ltd. & Ors. v. T.K. Raju, 2006 (2) SCALE 553].

Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 63 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Section 11A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 4680

1 2 Next