Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.28 seconds)Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd vs The Workmen & Ors on 3 October, 1966
Similarly, the
case law Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. (supra) is also not applicable to the
facts and circumstances of the present case.
Section 2 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Mangt.Of M/S Sonepat Coop.Sugar Mills ... vs Ajit Singh on 14 February, 2005
The Hon'ble Apex Court in Management of M/s. Sonepat
Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (supra ) referred to Miss A.
Sundarambai vs. Government of Goa, Daman and Diu and others
(1998) 4 SCC 42, wherein the Teachers serving in Educational
Institutions were held to be not workmen as they were not found to be
performing the duties of either manual or unskilled or skilled or
technical or clerical nature. In the present case, the petitioner was not
performing stereotype job. His job involved creativity. He would
evaluate the working of the other Departments of the Company and
submit his report to his superiors for taking policy decisions.
Section 82 in The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 [Entire Act]
The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948
Section 25 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
R.K. Tyagi, Adv. vs Labour Court And Anr. on 21 August, 2002
I have considered the
judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of Hon'ble Allahabad
High Court in R.K.Tyagi (supra), the same is not applicable to the
Kumar Parveen
2013.08.29 13:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh
CWP No.4518 of 1991 11
instant case, as it was decided under Section 2 (z) of the Uttar Pradesh
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 wherein by virtue of amendment, persons
working supervisory in capacity are specifically included in the
definition of "workman". However, no such amendment has been made
by the State of Haryana in the Industrial Disputes Act.
1