Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.30 seconds)
Through: Janhit Mazdoor Union vs The Directorate Of Family Welfare on 27 January, 2023 cites

Harish Chandra Singh vs District Deputy Director Of ... on 25 August, 2017

"More recently, in Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan & Another, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 161, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad vs. Siri Niwas, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 195 and M.P. Electricity Board vs. Hariram, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 246, this Court has reiterated the Page No. 11/12 Shri Harish Chander Vs. Director, The Directorate of Family Welfare LIR No. 3568/17 principle that the burden of proof lies on the workman to show that he had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceding one year prior to his alleged retrenchment and it is for the workman to adduce an evidence apart from examining himself to prove the factum of his being in employment of the employer."
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 13 September, 2004

"More recently, in Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan & Another, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 161, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad vs. Siri Niwas, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 195 and M.P. Electricity Board vs. Hariram, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 246, this Court has reiterated the Page No. 11/12 Shri Harish Chander Vs. Director, The Directorate of Family Welfare LIR No. 3568/17 principle that the burden of proof lies on the workman to show that he had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceding one year prior to his alleged retrenchment and it is for the workman to adduce an evidence apart from examining himself to prove the factum of his being in employment of the employer."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 241 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Municipal Corporation, Faridabad vs Siri Niwas on 6 September, 2004

"More recently, in Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan & Another, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 161, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad vs. Siri Niwas, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 195 and M.P. Electricity Board vs. Hariram, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 246, this Court has reiterated the Page No. 11/12 Shri Harish Chander Vs. Director, The Directorate of Family Welfare LIR No. 3568/17 principle that the burden of proof lies on the workman to show that he had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceding one year prior to his alleged retrenchment and it is for the workman to adduce an evidence apart from examining himself to prove the factum of his being in employment of the employer."
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 410 - S B Sinha - Full Document

M.P. Electricity Board vs Hariram on 27 September, 2004

"More recently, in Rajasthan State Ganganagar S. Mills Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan & Another, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 161, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad vs. Siri Niwas, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 195 and M.P. Electricity Board vs. Hariram, (2004) 8 S.C.C. 246, this Court has reiterated the Page No. 11/12 Shri Harish Chander Vs. Director, The Directorate of Family Welfare LIR No. 3568/17 principle that the burden of proof lies on the workman to show that he had worked continuously for 240 days in the preceding one year prior to his alleged retrenchment and it is for the workman to adduce an evidence apart from examining himself to prove the factum of his being in employment of the employer."
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 190 - Full Document

Surendranagar District Panchayat vs Dahyabhai Amarsinh on 25 October, 2005

27. It is for claimant to lead evidence for discharging burden of proof of continuous service for 240 days in the year preceding his termination and mere affidavit tendered in evidence is not sufficient to discharge the burden of 240 days of continuous service as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Range Forest Officer Vs. S.P. Hadimani (2002) 3 SCC 25; Municipal Corporation, Faridabad Vs. Siri Niwas (2004) 8 SCC 195; Surendernagar District Panchayat Vs. Dahiyabhai Amarsinh (2005) 8 SCC 750; Manager, Reserve Bank of India Bangalore Vs. S.Mani & Ors. (2005) 5 SCC 100; R.M. Yellatti Vs. Assistant Executive Engineer (2006) SCC 106 AND Mohd. Ali Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (2018) 15 SCC 641.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 300 - P P Naolekar - Full Document
1   2 Next