Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.29 seconds)The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
Maharashtra State Road Trans.Corp. ... vs Casteribe Rajya P. Karmchari ... on 28 August, 2009
Violation of Clause 4C of the MSO may tantamount to an unfair
labour practice under item 9 of Sch. IV of the 1971 Act but
unless & until, other additional factors are proved on record,
finding of indulgence in an unfair labour practice under item 6
of Sch. IV thereof can not be reached. As explained by the Hon.
Apex Court in case of Maharashtra SRTC v. Casteribe Rajya
Parivahan Karmchari Sanghatana, (supra), existence of a legal
vacancy must be established & as discussed above, the power to
recruit with the employer must also be demonstrated. In
absence thereof, workman can not succeed in proving the
commission of unfair labour practice under item 6 by the
employer. These two ingredients, therefore, also must be
established when benefit of Cl. 4-C is being claimed. Unless
availability of a vacancy is shown or then power with the
employer to create the post and to fill it is brought on record,
::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2016 23:59:21 :::
wp5191.04 47
mere continuation of 240 days can not and does not enable the
workman to claim permanency by taking recourse to Cl. 4C
read with item 9 of Sch. IV of 1971 Act. Clause 4C does not
employ word "regularisation" but then it is implicit in it as no
"permanency" is possible without it. Conversely, it follows that
when a statutory provision like S. 76 disables the employer
either from creating or filling in the posts, such a claim can not
be sustained.
Indian Tobacco Co. Ltd vs Industrial Court on 23 February, 1994
The
judgment of learned Single Judge in case of Indian Tobacco
Company Ltd. vs. The Industrial Court and Ors. (supra),
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court affirming it or then judgment
of Hon'ble Apex Court reported at Western India Match
::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2016 23:59:21 :::
wp5191.04 48
Company Ltd. and Workmen are all considered therein & are
distinguishable as the same do not pertain to the province of
public employment or consider inherent Constitutional
restraints (the suprema lex - see Mahendra L. Jain v. Indore
Development Authority and others (supra) and Cl. 32 of the
MSO. For same reasons, law laid down by the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in 2007 (1) CLR 460- 2007 (1) Mah.
Mr.Ramesh Vitthal Patil & Ors vs Kalyan Dombivali Municipal ... on 7 June, 2010
The
judgment of learned Single Judge in case of Indian Tobacco
Company Ltd. vs. The Industrial Court and Ors. (supra),
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court affirming it or then judgment
of Hon'ble Apex Court reported at Western India Match
::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2016 23:59:21 :::
wp5191.04 48
Company Ltd. and Workmen are all considered therein & are
distinguishable as the same do not pertain to the province of
public employment or consider inherent Constitutional
restraints (the suprema lex - see Mahendra L. Jain v. Indore
Development Authority and others (supra) and Cl. 32 of the
MSO. For same reasons, law laid down by the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in 2007 (1) CLR 460- 2007 (1) Mah.
Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (Bilt ... vs Maharashtra Lok Kamgar Sanghatana And ... on 2 March, 2016
Respondents -Daily Wagers appointed without following the
prescribed procedure for selection by passing public
participation did not acquire any legal right to claim
permanency. It is apparent that no inconsistency exists and
cannot be worked out in State of Maharashtra & Anr. Vs.
Pandurang Sitaram Jadhav as also Pune Municipal Corporation
v. Dhananjay Prabhakar Gokhale (supra) on one hand and
Ballarpur Industries Limited Vs. Maharashtra Lok Kamgar
::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2016 23:59:21 :::
wp5191.04 51
Sanghatana (supra) on the other hand. Status of employer,
nature of employment and inherent Constitutional limitation on
public employer or absence of such fetters on any private
employer or absolute freedom available to it to create post/s
and recruit, are some of the distinguishing features which
prohibit this exercise.
Pune Municipal Corporation And Ors. vs Dhananjay Prabhakar Gokhale on 29 March, 2006
Respondents -Daily Wagers appointed without following the
prescribed procedure for selection by passing public
participation did not acquire any legal right to claim
permanency. It is apparent that no inconsistency exists and
cannot be worked out in State of Maharashtra & Anr. Vs.
Pandurang Sitaram Jadhav as also Pune Municipal Corporation
v. Dhananjay Prabhakar Gokhale (supra) on one hand and
Ballarpur Industries Limited Vs. Maharashtra Lok Kamgar
::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2016 23:59:21 :::
wp5191.04 51
Sanghatana (supra) on the other hand. Status of employer,
nature of employment and inherent Constitutional limitation on
public employer or absence of such fetters on any private
employer or absolute freedom available to it to create post/s
and recruit, are some of the distinguishing features which
prohibit this exercise.