Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.24 seconds)The Management Of Binny Ltd. (B & C Mills) vs The Govt. Of Tamil Nadu And Ors. on 12 December, 1987
20. The learned counsel further submitted that if a settlement is holding the field, the question of the Tribunal adjudicating the said dispute will not arise. For this purpose, he relied on a judgment of a Division Bench of this court in The Management of Binny Ltd., (B & C Mills) v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and others reported in 1989 1 LLJ 180 and referred to the following passage found in paragraph 32, which is as follows:-
Transport & Dock Workers Union & Ors vs Mumbai Port Trust & Anr on 15 November, 2010
30. If the warning handed down in Associated Cement's case and the subsequent pronouncement in Mumbai Port Trust case are kept in mind, the Tribunal would not have interfered with the timings fixed by the petitioner Hospital. As already noted, the Tribunal had not given any single reason to modify the shift hours except bringing its own concept of overlapping shift and lean hours during which patients will take rest. The Tribunal also did not look into the pleadings of the parties and the oral and documentary evidence let in by the petitioner Hospital.
Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club & ... vs Chander Hass & Anr on 6 December, 2007
In several decisions, we have held that there must be judicial restraint in such matters, vide Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass13.
Government Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors vs Smt. P. Laxmi Devi on 25 February, 2008
In Govt. of A.P. v. P. Laxmi Devi14 the doctrine of judicial review of statutes has been discussed in great detail, and it has been observed that the judiciary must show great restraint in this connection.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 9A in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Associated Cement Staff Union And The ... vs The Associated Cement Co. Ltd., Bombay, ... on 3 December, 1963
30. If the warning handed down in Associated Cement's case and the subsequent pronouncement in Mumbai Port Trust case are kept in mind, the Tribunal would not have interfered with the timings fixed by the petitioner Hospital. As already noted, the Tribunal had not given any single reason to modify the shift hours except bringing its own concept of overlapping shift and lean hours during which patients will take rest. The Tribunal also did not look into the pleadings of the parties and the oral and documentary evidence let in by the petitioner Hospital.
Section 10 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
1