Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.24 seconds)Section 2 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
H.D. Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India & Ors on 10 September, 1985
Labour Court
[1977] 1 SCR 586 and two benches of two judges in Robert
D'Souza v. Executive Engineer, Southern Railway and Anr.
[1982] 1 SCC 645 and H. D. Singh v. Reserve Bank of India
and Ors. [1985] 4 SCC 201 took the same view. Therefore, we
find force in the contention of Sri R. K. lain, the learned
Senior counsel for the appellant that the definition
'retrenchment' in S.2(oo) is a comprehensive one intended to
cover any action of the management to put an end to the
employment of an employee for any reason whatsoever. We
need not, however, rest our conclusion on this point as in
our considered view it could be decided on the other
contention raised by Sri Jain that the order is violative of
the principles of natural justice. We are impressed with
that argument. Before dealing with it, it is necessary to
dispose of inter related contentions raised by Dr. Anand
Prakash.
Section 25FFF in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chiief Election Commissioner, New ... on 2 December, 1977
In Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr.
v. The Chief Election Commissioner & Ors. [1978] 2 SCR 272
at 308F the Constitution Bench held that 'civil consequence'
covers infraction of not merely property or personal right
but of civil liberties, material deprivations and non-
pecuniary damages. In its comprehensive connotion every
thing that affects a citizen in his civil life inflicts a
civil consequence. Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition,
page 1487 defined civil rights are such as belong to every
citizen of the state or country they include rights capable
of being enforced or redressed in a civil action.
State Of Orissa vs Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei & Ors on 7 February, 1967
In State
of Orissa v. Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei & Ors., this court held
that even an administrative order which involves civil
consequences must be made consistently with the rules of
natural justice. The person concerned must be informed of
the case, the evidence in support thereof supplied and must
be given a fair opportunity to meet the case before an
adverse decision is taken. Since no such opportunity was
given it was held that superannuation was in violation of
principles of natural justice.
The State Of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar on 11 January, 1952
In State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar [1952] SCR 289,
per majority, a seven Judge bench held that the rule of
procedure laid down by law comes as much within the purview
of Art. 14 of the Constitution as any rule of substantive
law.