Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.36 seconds)Section 10 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Steel Authority Of India Ltd. & Ors. ... vs National Union Water Front Workers & Ors on 30 August, 2001
14. Conversely, APGENCO filed its counter inter alia contending that the
deployment of the Workman and others through contractor was on their own
accord and it was not requisitioned by the APGENCO. It had pleaded that
there was no Master and Servant relationship between the Workmen and
APGENCO. It is further version of the APGENCO that the workman was not
on rolls as on the requisite date and did not fulfil the conditions prescribed in
B.P.Ms.No.37, dated 18.05.1997 and B.P.Ms.272, dated 31.12.1997.
Therefore, the Workman is not eligible for absorption. It is further contended
that the Workman is not entitled for absorption in view of decision held in
7
Steel Authority of India Ltd Vs National Union of Waterfront Workers1.
Thereby resisted the claim filed by the Workman.
Article 12 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Air India Statutory Corporation vs United Labour Union & Ors on 6 November, 1996
In Steel Authority of India Ltd and Others Vs National Union
Waterfront Workers and Others (referred to above), a five (5) Judge Bench
of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court while dealing with the provisions of the Contract
Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 along with its object and
intendment by scanning the relevant facets of the Contract Labour aspects,
overruled the dictum held in Air India Statutory Corporation Vs. United
17
Labour Union3 and in unequivocal words arrived its findings. For the sake of
comprehensive view, the relevant paras 125 & 126 read as under: