Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.89 seconds)

State Of Orissa & Anr vs Mamata Mohanty on 9 February, 2011

23.In the light of the terms of the contract read with Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act and in view of the dictum laid by the Honourable Supreme Court in Vishweswara Rao .vs. The Union of India reported in 1996(6)SCC 216 and in the State of Orissa .vs. Mamata Mohanty reported in 2011(3) SCC 436, We hold that the learned Single Judge after careful analysis of the law and the facts, had rightly concluded that, the relief claimed by the Writ Petitioners are not sustainable. The grounds of appeals does not carry any merit to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge passed in the common order, dated 04.08.2014. 18/20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:22 pm )
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 995 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

A. Visweswara Rao vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. on 29 October, 2003

13.Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the Management of BHEl submitted that the old recruitment policy in Rule 4.2 and 4.4 provided induction of trained apprentices in A-III SA-I Grade by absorbtion to artison trainees and 11/20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:22 pm ) supervisory trainees on satisfactory completiton of their apprentices, who have been trained under the Apprentices Act, 1961. The Management of BHEL has been scrupuluously following the Rule till ban on recruitment to the regular vacancy imposed in the year 1985 and continued till 2005. By that time, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Viswesvara Rao .vs. The Union of India reported in 1996(6)SCC 216 came down heavily on the back door recruitment without following the due process of law and mandated that in case of employment in public sector, all eligible citizens should be given equal opportunity by giving wide publications through newspapers, besides, calling for list from the Employment Exchange. Following the spirit of the Honourable Supreme Court that there can no more be in house recruitment without wide publication and in view of the Office Memorandum by the Government of India, dated 24.11.1998 issued in tune with the direction of the Honourable Supreme Court in Viswesvara Rao’s case cited supra, the respondents/Management of BHEL ameneded its Recriutment Policy and started recruitment through vide paper publication in addition to inviting eligible candidates from Employment Exchange.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

R. Vithaleswara Rao vs Union Of India, on 12 October, 2022

23.In the light of the terms of the contract read with Section 22(2) of the Apprentices Act and in view of the dictum laid by the Honourable Supreme Court in Vishweswara Rao .vs. The Union of India reported in 1996(6)SCC 216 and in the State of Orissa .vs. Mamata Mohanty reported in 2011(3) SCC 436, We hold that the learned Single Judge after careful analysis of the law and the facts, had rightly concluded that, the relief claimed by the Writ Petitioners are not sustainable. The grounds of appeals does not carry any merit to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge passed in the common order, dated 04.08.2014. 18/20 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:22 pm )
Telangana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A K Shavili - Full Document
1