Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (1.08 seconds)
Deputy Executive Engineer Sardar ... vs Mahadevbhai Dhanjibhai Khokhar & on 9 January, 2017 cites

Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006

14. So   far   as   the   said   decision   by   the  learned   Labour   Court   is   concerned,   it   is  appropriate to take into account the observations  by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Secretary, State  of   Karnataka   and   others   vs.   Umadevi   (3)   and   others   [(2006)   4   SCC   1],   wherein   Hon'ble   Apex  Court has observed, inter alia, that:
Supreme Court of India Cites 46 - Cited by 4959 - P K Balasubramanyan - Full Document

Supreme Court Reports [1962] Supp.Dr. ... vs The Governing Body Of The Nalanda ... on 15 December, 1961

43.   Normally,   what   is   sought   for   by   such   temporary  employees  when they approach  the court,  is the issue of a  writ of mandamus  directing  the employer,  the State  or its  instrumentalities,   to   absorb   them   in   permanent   service   or  to   allow   them   to   continue.   In   this   context,   the   question  arises whether a mandamus could be issued in favour of such  persons.   At   this   juncture,   it   will   be   proper   to   refer   to  the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Dr.  Rai Shivendra Bahadur Vs. The Governing Body of the Nalanda  College [(1962) Supp. 2 SCR 144]. That case arose out of a  refusal   to   promote   the   writ   petitioner   therein   as   the  Principal of a college. This Court held that in order that  a   mandamus   may   issue   to   compel   the   authorities   to   do  something,   it   must   be   shown   that   the   statute   imposes   a  legal duty on the authority  and the aggrieved  party had a  legal right under the statute or rule to enforce it. This  classical   position   continues   and   a   mandamus   could   not   be  issued in favour of the employees directing the government  to make them permanent since the employees cannot show that  they   have   an   enforceable   legal   right   to   be   permanently  absorbed  or  that  the  State  has  a  legal  duty   to  make  them  permanent.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 446 - J L Kapur - Full Document

Bhavnagar Municipality vs Alibhai Karimbhai & Others on 8 February, 1977

8.11 The finding of fact and final conclusion  recorded   by   the   learned   Labour   Court   are   in  consonance   with   section   33   of   the   Act   and  supported  by  the decision  by Hon'ble   Apex Court  in   case   of  Bhavnagar   Municipality   (supra).  Therefore,   the   said   findings   of   fact   and   final  conclusion by the learned Labour Court cannot be  faulted and they do not warrant any interference.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 98 - P K Goswami - Full Document
1   2 Next