Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: equal remuneration act 1976 Page 1 of about 70,721 results (0.188 seconds)

Aug 13 2004 (HC)

Smt. Bimla Rani W/O Sh. Padam Bahadur and ors. Vs. Appellate Authority ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 113(2004)DLT441; [2005(104)FLR34]; (2005)IILLJ148Del; 2005(1)SLJ481(Delhi)

..... petitioners are ladies employed with respondent no.2. they had filed a claim under section 7(1)(b) of the equal remuneration act, 1976 (the act) claiming the same pay-scale as granted to men performing the same work. 2. section 7(1)(b) of the act reads as follows: - ''7. power of appropriate government to appoint authorities for hearing and deciding claims and complaints. - (1 ..... or a woman and the differences, if any, are not of any practical importance in relation to the terms of employment. 18. section 4 of the act places a duty upon the employer to pay equal remuneration to men and women for same work or work of a similar nature. 19. reference may also be made to another convention, which came into effect ..... the ground of sex against women in the matter of employment. 16. remuneration is defined in the act to mean the basic wage or salary and any additional emoluments whatsoever ..... laid down in the convention and on our part, parliament enacted the act which was promulgated on 26th september, 1975 as an ordinance. that year incidentally, was celebrated as international women's year. the ordinance was duly replaced by the act which is intended to provide for the payment of equal remuneration to men and women workers and for the prevention of discrimination on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 1987 (HC)

Koshy and Thomas Vs. State

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1987KAR3814

..... did not respond to this notice also. according to the complaint, petitioners nos. 1 and 2 have contravened rule 6 of the equal remuneration rules, 1976 read with section 8 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 and have thereby rendered themselves liable for prosecution and punishment under section 10(1)(a) of the said actthe complaint is preceded by the ..... section10(1)(a) of the equal remuneration act, 1976, for contravention of rule 6 of the equal remuneration rules, 1976 read with section 8 of the said act.the labour enforcement officer (central), bangalore, inspected the construction of extension to high bay for isac at nal complex, bangalore ..... 85. 5. the facts in criminal petition no. 901/85 ----------------------------------------- (c.c. no. 875 of 1985)the labour enforcement officer (central), bangalore and inspector under the equal remuneration act, 1976 has lodged a complaint against k.e. koshy (petitioner no. 1) and tomcos engineers and contractors represented by its partner k.m. thomas (petitioner no. 2) under ..... nos. i and 2 under section 10(1)(a) of the equal remuneration act, 1976, for contravention of rule 6 of the equal remuneration rules, 1976, made punishable under section 8 of the said act.the labour enforcement officer (central), bangalore, is the inspector under section 9(1) of the equal remuneration act. 1976, for the state of karnataka under the notification s.o. no. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1987 (SC)

M/s. Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. Ltd. Vs. Audrey D'costa and another

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1987SC1281; (1987)2CompLJ165(SC); 1987(89)Crimes156; [1987(54)FLR530]; JT1987(2)SC34; (1987)ILLJ536SC; 1987(1)SCALE627; (1987)2SCC469; [1987]2SCR659; 1988(1)SLJ196(SC);

..... of the high court of bombay in appeal no. 1042 of 1986, the question whether the petitioner had violated the provisions of section 4 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 (no. 25 of 1976) (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') arises for consideration.2. the petitioner is a company carrying on the business of rendering supporting services to water transport, like operation and maintenance of piers ..... up of advisory committees to promote employment opportunities for women. the above ordinance was replaced by the act which received the assent of the president on february 11, 1976. the long title of the act states that it is intended to provide for the payment of equal remuneration to men and women workers and for the prevention of discrimination on the ground of sex against ..... women in the matter of employment and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. sub-section (3) of section 1 of the act provides that the act shall ..... having effect under any law for the time being in force. the crucial section which arises for consideration in this case is section 4 of the act. it reads thus:4. duty of employer to pay equal remuneration to men and women workers for same work or work of a similar nature-(1) no employer shall pay to any worker, employed by him .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 2003 (SC)

Air India CabIn Crew Association Vs. Yeshawinee Merchant and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2004SC187; 2003(4)ALD97(SC); 2003(4)ALLMR(SC)364; JT2003(5)SC413; (2003)IIILLJ1SC; 2003(5)SCALE208; (2003)6SCC277; 2003(2)LC1358(SC); (2003)2UPLBEC1852

..... india dated 17th june, 1979 which reads as under:'new delhi, the june 15, 1979. s.o. 2258 - in exercise of the powers conferred by section 16 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 (25 of 1976) the central government having considered all the circumstances relating to, and terms and conditions of employment of air hostesses and flight stewards, are satisfied that the difference in regard ..... issued by the central government, therefore, also cannot be held to be in any manner in violation of article 14, 15 and 16 of the constitution or the provisions of equal remuneration act, 1976.effect of pending reference no. 1 of 1990 before the national industrial tribunal. 71. we have already held above that the high court committed a serious error of procedure and ..... find that the conditions of services applicable to the air hostesses both presently working in air or on ground are discriminatory under article 14, 15 and 16 of the constitution.equal remuneration act, 1976. 52. in the impugned judgment, the high court has also held that the term of service fixed by air india to retire air hostesses at the age of 50 years ..... of grounding them on alternative jobs is also discriminatory treatment to them on sex which violates section 5 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 [for short, 'the e.r. act of 1976']. the high court also took note of the fact that there existed a declaration under section 16 of the e.r .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1981 (SC)

Air India Vs. Nergesh Meerza and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1981SC1829; 1981LabIC1313; (1981)IILLJ314SC; 1981(3)SCALE1275; (1981)4SCC335; [1982]1SCR438; 1981(2)SLJ349(SC)

..... 'a.i. regulation' and 'i.a.c. regulation' respectively.(4) nergesh meerza and ors. as 'petitioners'. (5) declaration by the central government under equal remuneration act as 'declaration' and equal remuneration act 1976 as '1976 act'. (6) air corporation act of 1953 as '1953 act.'(7) justice khosla award as 'khosla award' and justice mahesh chandra award as 'mahesh award'. (8) assistant flight pursers as 'afps' (9) air ..... ) dated 30.6.79, which runs thus: new delhi, the 15th june 1979.s.c. 2258-in exercise of the powers conferred by section 16 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 25 of 1976) the central government having considered all the circumstances relating to, and terms and conditions of employment of air hostesses and flight stewards, are satisfied that the difference in ..... no option but to accept the argument of mr. setalvad. it would, however, appear that the benefit conferred on the females under the 1976 act is not absolute and unconditional. section 16 clearly authorises restrictions regarding remuneration to be paid by the employer if a declaration under it is made by the appropriate government, which may be extracted thus: 16. ..... than sex. both parties placed reliance on the 1976 act. it may be necessary to examine the relevant section of the 1976 act. sub-sections (1) and (3) section 4 of the 1976 act may be extracted thus: 4. (1) no employer shall pay to any worker, employed by him in an establishment or employment, remuneration, whether payable in cash or in kind, at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 1994 (HC)

R.H. Bhatt Vs. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1995)1GLR327

..... of infraction of this rules falls for consideration.' the supreme court in this very connection referred to the provisions of equal remuneration act, 1976, and more particularly to the definition of expression 'same work or work of similar nature' contained in clause (h) of section 2 of the ..... equal remuneration act, 1976. after referring to the provision of said act, the supreme court noticed that the act was enacted by the parliament by art. 39(d) of the constitution of india and the obligation created by the convention concerning equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value' to which ..... 1988 ii clr 597 (sc) the apex court speaking through k. jagannatha shetty, j. ruled that the underlying constitutional philosophy behind doctrine of equal pay for equal work is that in the matter of employment the government of socialist state must protect the weaker sections. it must be ensured that there is ..... construing arts. 14 and 16 in the light of the preamble and art. 39(d) we are of the view that the principle 'equal pay for equal work' is deducible from those articles and may be properly applied to case of unequal scales of pay based on non classification or irrational ..... made to large number of considerations which shall have to be kept in mind while deciding the question as to whether the doctrine of equal pay for equal work would apply so as to entitle the petitioner to a higher pay scale which is being offered to range forest officer. before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1996 (SC)

Sita Devi and Others Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1996SC2764; [1996(74)FLR2386]; JT1996(7)SC438; (1996)IILLJ817SC; 1996(6)SCALE151; (1996)10SCC1; [1996]Supp5SCR173; 1996(2)LC513(SC); (1997)1UPLBEC567

..... has to be judged. it was held, after referring to the definition of 'same work or work of a similar nature' in section 2(h) of equal remuneration act 1976, that :the stress is upon the similarity of skill, effort and responsibility when performed under similar conditions. further, as pointed out by mukherji, j. (as ..... matriculates they too have been performing the very same duties as were being performed by matriculate teachers (petitioners in jaipal). the petitioners invoke the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. according to them, except the difference in the matter of educational qualifications their is no other distinction between the post held and the duties and ..... u.p. : (1986)illj134sc and surinder singh v. engineer-in-chief, cpwd : (1986)illj403sc .4. the doctrine of 'equal work for equal pay' is recognised by this court as a facet of the equality clause contained in article 14 of the constitution. the first of the several decisions on the subject is randhir singh v. union of india ..... or overlook this reality. it is not a matter of assumption but one of proof.... it must be remembered that since the plea of equal pay for equal work has to be examined with reference to article 14, the burden is upon the petitioners to establish their right to ..... equal pay, or the plea of discrimination, as the case may be.5. it was observed in the said decision, on the basis of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1986 (HC)

Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. Ltd. Vs. Audrey D'Costa of Bombay and Anr. ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1987(2)BomCR654; (1986)88BOMLR516

..... amount to the petitioner company.10. accordingly, petition partly succeeds and the matter is remitted back to the deputy commissioner of labour (enforcement) appellate authority under the equal remuneration act, 1976 for computing the amount payable to respondent no. 1 in the light of this judgment, the computation should be completed within two weeks from the date of receipt ..... of india, the petitioner employer is challenging the legality of the order dated may 31, 1982 passed by the deputy commissioner of labour (enforcement). appellate authority under the equal remuneration act, 1976. the facts giving rise to passing of this order are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners.2. the petitioners mackinnon mackenzie & co ..... 1981. thereafter on september 5, 1981 respondent no. 1 filed application for claim as contemplated by section 7 of the equal remuneration act, 1976 before the authority appointed under the act. respondent no. 1 1976 before the authority appointed under the act. respondent no. 1 claimed that the basic salary was reduced and even though the dearness allowance was increased the total ..... the difference is not on account of sex and therefore the provisions of the act have no application. before examining these submissions, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of the act.5. the equal remuneration act, 1976 was enacted to provide for a payment of equal remuneration to men and women workers for the same work or work of a similar .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2006 (HC)

K.V. Kamath Vs. Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2006(4)CHN658,[2007(113)FLR853],(2007)ILLJ936Cal

..... m. narayandas v. state of karnataka, reported in 2004 scc (cri) 118.6. the present petitioner is being prosecuted under section 10(1)(a) of the equal remuneration act, 1976 read with rule 6 of the equal remuneration rules, 1976.7. under rule 6 of the said rules, every employer is under an obligation to maintain up-to-date register in relation to the workers employed by ..... stems from an application filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the proceeding being case no. c-3006 of 2002 under section 10(1)(a) of the equal remuneration act, 1976 read with rule 6 of the equal remuneration rules, 1976 and for setting aside the orders dated 04.06.2003 to 05.04.2004 passed therein, pending in the court of learned metropolitan magistrate, 5th court ..... of the respective branch is entrusted with the day-to-day affairs of such branch and is being treated as an employer as defined in section 2(c) of the equal remuneration act, 1976, and as such the petitioner has unnecessarily been implicated in the case. there is no actuaries nor mens rea insofar as the petitioner is concerned who cannot also be held ..... , calcutta.2. the circumstances leading to the above application are that o.p. no. 1 lodged a complaint under section 10(1)(a) of the equal remuneration act, 1976 read with rule 6 of the said rules inter alia alleging that the accused persons failed to maintain register in form 'd' at their work-spot at 19, synagogue street .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1992 (SC)

State of Madhya Pradesh and Another Vs. Pramod Bhartiya and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1993SC286; [1992(65)FLR991]; JT1992(5)SC683; (1993)ILLJ490SC; 1993(I)OLR(SC)448; 1992(2)SCALE791; (1993)1SCC539; [1992]Supp1SCR904

..... context, it would be appropriate to refer to the definition of the expressions 'same work or work of similar nature' contained in clause (h) of section 2 of the equal remuneration act, 1976. the said act was enacted by parliament (as pointed out by this court in mackinnon mackenzie v. andrey d'costa : (1987)illj536sc to implement article 39(d) of the constitution and the ..... a signatory. article 2 of the convention obliged the signatory states to effectuate the said rule by all means including the machinery of law. the said act is applicable to such establishments ..... obligation created by 'the convention concerning equal remuneration for men and women workers' for work of equal value (generally referred to as 'equal remuneration convention, 1951') adopted on june 29, 1951, to which india is .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //