Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.24 seconds)Messrs. Shalimar Works Limited vs Their Workmen on 8 May, 1959
A delay of 4
years in raising the dispute after even
reemployment of the most of the old workmen
was held to be fatal in M/s. Shalimar Works
Limited v. Their Workmen (supra) (AIR 1959 SC
1217), In Nedungadi Bank Ltd. v. K.P.
Madhavankutty and others (supra) AIR 2000 SC
839, a delay of 7 years was held to be fatal and
disentitled to workmen to any relief.
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Nedungadi Bank Ltd vs K.P. Madhavankutty And Ors on 28 January, 2000
A delay of 4
years in raising the dispute after even
reemployment of the most of the old workmen
was held to be fatal in M/s. Shalimar Works
Limited v. Their Workmen (supra) (AIR 1959 SC
1217), In Nedungadi Bank Ltd. v. K.P.
Madhavankutty and others (supra) AIR 2000 SC
839, a delay of 7 years was held to be fatal and
disentitled to workmen to any relief.
Daily Rated Casual Labour ... vs Union Of India & Others on 27 October, 1987
Pursuant to the judgment in Daily
Rated Casual Employees Under P&T
Department v. Union of India (supra) (AIR 1987
SC 2342), the department was formulating a
scheme to accommodate casual labourers and
the appellants were justified in awaiting the
outcome thereof. On 16-1-1990 they were
refused to be accommodated in the scheme. On
28-12-1990 they initiated the proceedings
under the Industrial Disputes Act followed by
conciliation proceedings and then the dispute
was referred to the Industrial Tribunal cum-
Labour Court. We do not think that the
appellants deserve to be non suited on the
ground of delay."
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 18 in The State Bank Of India Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
Kshetriya Kisan Gramin Bank vs D.B. Sharma And Ors on 15 November, 2000
In para 6 of Kshetriya Kisan Gramin Bank's case (supra) stress
was laid on comparable level and status. In SBI there is no
post of Joint Custodian. In the State Bank of India and the
sponsored bank there are two posts as cash officer and clerk
cum cashier who perform distinct functions. The custody of
the cash is held by the cash officer and as and when cashiers
perform the additional function of cash officer they are paid an
allowance of Rs.380/- which is called officiating allowance and
not the keys allowance. Significantly in RRB the cash in charge
is a workman, while in the sponsor bank he is an officer. In
view of what has been stated above, this appeal is bound to
succeed. It is, however, directed that no amount shall be
recovered from the period from 1.1.1991 to 21.10.1991. The
amounts already paid shall not be recovered if not already done.
There shall be no order as to costs.
The National Bank For Agriculture And Rural Development Act, 1981
M/S. Polyglass Acrylic Mfg..Co.Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, ... on 31 March, 2003
In S.M. Nilajkar and Ors. v. Telecom District Manager,
Karnataka (2003 (4) SCC 27) the position was reiterated as
follows: (at para 17)
"17. It was submitted on behalf of the
respondent that on account of delay in raising
the dispute by the appellants the High Court
was justified in denying relief to the appellants.
We cannot agree.