Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.34 seconds)Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, U.P. vs Anil Kumar Mishra And Others Etc. on 19 August, 1992
23. The question posed in this writ application is not as to whether the Municipality would be an industry. Even assuming that the writ petitioners were workmen, they could raise an industrial dispute if and when their services are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act but as has been held by the Supreme Court in Madhyamik Siksha Parishad, U. P. v. Anil Kumar Misra, (supra) that the said provision does not confer any right upon the employees to be absorbed in permanent services only because they have completed 240 days of service. It has clearly been laid down by the Apex Court that Section 25-F merely imposes an obligation on the employer not to terminate the service of a workman who has completed 240 days of work without paying compensation in the manner as laid down therein.
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993
West Bengal Essential Commodities ... vs Md. Sarif on 18 August, 1999
14. This aspect of the matter has been considered in W.B.E.C.S. Corpn. Ltd. v. Md. Sarif, (supra), Director of Public Instructions of West Bengal v. Dr. Ashish Pal, 1998 (2) Cal HN 241; Director of Public Instruction v. Krishna Prasad Ghosh, 2000 (2) Cal LT 141.
Samishta Dube vs City Board, Etawah And Anr on 26 February, 1999
In Samishta Dubey v. City Board Etawah, (supra) the Apex Court has merely held that a Municipal Board is an industry within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The said decision was rendered in respect of General Administration Department of a Municipal Corporation.