Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR711; (1959)IILLJ177Bom
..... terms of s. 8(1) of the general clauses act we cannot look to those circumstances. it was conceded that there was nothing in the maternity benefit ..... the other enactment or instrument, and we cannot turn to circumstances outside those acts or instruments to find whether a contrary intention appears or not. all the three contentions raised by mr. phadke refer to such circumstances outside the enactment, namely the factories act, 1948, and the minimum wages act, in the present case and, in my opinion, having regard to the ..... conferred upon their female employees. 19. on a question similar to the second contention of mr. phadke as to the applicability of the definition of 'factory' contained in the factories act of 1948 to the workmen's compensation act, a division bench of the calcutta high court ruled in khuda bux v. manager, caledonian press : (1954)iillj13cal that s. 8 of the ..... day the maternity benefit act in defining 'factory' refers to s. 2(i) of the factories act of 1934, and makes no reference to the factories act of 1948. mr. phadke's argument is founded upon this failure to amend the maternity benefit act in consequences of the enactment of the factories act of 1948. 7. the factories act of 1948 made sweeping changes in the definition of 'factory' as contained in s .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(2)BomCR1; [1991(63)FLR740]; (1995)IIILLJ867Bom
..... obligation is cast on the company who is the principal employer. while deciding the aforesaid appeal, the division bench has gone through the various provisions of the act of 1948, the factories act, 1948 and also the companies act, 1956. the division bench came to the conclusion that principal employer in case of a company is a company and not the directors. when the public limited ..... the company towards the esi arrears. the reason being, it is an admitted position that one mr. g.n.mathur, technical director, was nominated as an occupier of the factory, under the factories act, 1948. not only that, against the said mr. mathur, the respondent no. 4 had started proceedings and in the said proceeding, the said mr. g.n. mathur filed an application ..... of the reply, it is stated on behalf of the respondent no. 4 that the company had nominated mr. g.n. mathur, technical director, as the occupier of the factory under the factories act, 1948. however, it is further contended that mr. mathur had no financial powers as he is the employee of the company, subordinate to the managing director of the company, ashok ..... if the petitioner in writ petition no. 20 of 1985 is a managing director, he cannot be an occupier in view of the definition under section 2(n) of the factories act, 1948.13. from the aforesaid discussion, the legal position appears to be is that, even the petitioner in writ petition no. 20 of 1985 was a managing director at the relevant .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1955Bom209; (1955)57BOMLR135; 1955CriLJ932; ILR1955Bom624; (1955)IILLJ182Bom
..... thus rendered himself liable to punishment under section 92.12. the learned magistrate, mr. k. n. parikh, also acquitted the accused, holding that the karim bidi factory was not a factory as contemplated by the factories act, 1948.13. the state, feeling aggrieved by the orders of acquittal in these cases, has come up in appeal.14. mr. mandgi who appears for the state con ..... punishment under section 92, factories act, 1948. 8. the learned magistrate, mr. s. s. thakur, made an order of acquittal precisely on the same grounds on which the order of acquittal was based in criminal appeal no ..... the dunking water pot in the office was not marked as 'drinking water' in any language, and by doing so the accused had contravened the provisions of, section 18(2), factories act, 1948, as subsequently amended. the complaint ended by reciting that the accused had thereby committed an offence under the said sections and the said rules and had rendered himself liable to ..... that by not making arrangements to store drinking water to the extent of 110gallons the accused, who was the manager, hadcontravened, the provisions of rule 37 read withsection 18(4), factories act, 1948, as subsequentlyamended.it was also alleged that the total amount of drinking water available at the time was only 13 1/2 gallons and by not keeping sufficient amount of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All109
..... no such exercise of mind by the provincial government because the notification makes no mention at all of section 112. when the rules were framed, this provision of section 112, factories act, 1948, was lost sight of altogether and consequently there could be no question of the provincial government making the rules after coming to a finding that it was expedient to make ..... , when promulgating these rules, purported to make these rules in exercise of the power conferred by section 49 and not in exercise of the extended power conferred by section 112, factories act, 1948. even the further argument that, because further power under section 112 of the actrests with the provincial government, the rules must be held valid, though the notification does not make ..... this type cannot be considered as qualifications for election to the membership of the parliament. on the same analogy, the word 'qualifications' used in sub-section (2) of section 49, factories act, 1948, cannot be construed to include the procedure for recruitment and appointment which has been prescribed in rules nos. 5 7, 8 and 9. 5. the learned counsel for the opposite ..... conditions of service of the officers. this rule, therefore, clearly falls within the purview of the rule-making power of the provincial government under sub-section (2) of section 49, factories act 1948, and is therefore, a valid rule. 4. we, however, feel that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners with respect to rules nos. 5, 7, 8 and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(1)Raj787; 2006(1)WLC734
..... , therefore, preferred a writ petition before the single judge and the learned single judge while examining the controversy examined the definition of 'worker' under section 2(1) of the factories act, 1948 and was pleased to examine as to who are the persons who would be treated as 'worker' and thereafter also examined the provisions of the shops and commercial establishments under ..... is crystal clear that the petitioner is an employee of m/s. anil steel and industries ltd. which is clearly governed by the factories act, 1948, whose workman would be governed by the provisions of the industrial disputes act.7. learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents have not agreed with each other as to whether m/s. anil steel and ..... was pleased to record that such workmen who are employed in a shop attached to the factory are allowed the benefit provided under the act 1958 as they have been excluded under the factories act of 1948. the definition under the factories act 1948 clearly lays down that, the shop attached to a factory is excluded, which makes it clear that the person who are employed in a ..... factory which falls within the purview of the factories act 1948 are also excluded there from and hence they can .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2001)IILLJ843Mad
..... among the individual and group of people to secure adequate means of livelihood which is the foundation for stability of political democracy.'50. hacking back to the provisions of the factories act, 1948, in chapter vi, provisions have been made with respect to the regulation of working hours of adults. section 51 prescribes that no adult worker shall be required or allowed ..... employment of women beyond the hours specified in the said restrictions is necessary to prevent damage to or deterioration in any raw material.37. the object of the enactment namely factories act, 1948, has been summarised by their lordships of the supreme court in b. y. kshatriya (private), ltd. v. union of india reported in : (1963)illj270sc . in that context it has ..... india is a signatory, the government has to give effect to the international instrument by suitable provisions in national laws. section 66(1)(b) and section 66(2) of the factories act, 1948 cannot be construed as discriminatory, unreasonable and unconstitutional or violative of articles 14 and 15 of the constitution.21. it is contended that there is no significant improvement in the ..... employee, is unable to carry on her chosen employment between 7.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m. and hence she had challenged section 66(1)(b) of the factories act, 1948.6. according to the petitioner the fifth respondent-company, a leading public limited company, has established a composite textile mill consisting of spinning, weaving, processing and printing at belathur .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1956Bom219; (1956)58BOMLR66; 1956CriLJ488; ILR1956Bom321; (1956)IILLJ26Bom
..... put by eminent authorities upon the term 'premises' occurring in the various welfare legislations, we are of the view that the word 'premises' in clause (m) of section 2, factories act, 1948, means not only buildings, but includes lands as well. 17. proceeding next to the question of construction of clause (k) of section 2, the view which the learned chief presidency ..... , but also his lands where his men work, clean and healthy, so also it is fair and just to assume that, while enacting the factories act, 1948, the legislature intended that the occupier of a factory, whether the factory is situated in a building or on an open land, must look to the welfare of his workers, whether they work in buildings or on ..... clause (m) of section 2 is thrown by a comparison of the definition of 'factory' in sub-section (3) of section 2, factories act, 1911, with the definition as contained in clause (m) of section 2 of the present act (the factories act, 1948). in the act of 1911 'factory' was defined as under: factory means any premises wherein 'or within the precints of which on any one day ..... from a judgment of the learned chief presidency magistrate, bombay, acquitting the respondent who was charged with having committed an offence under section 92, factories act 1948, for breach of the provisions of section 6, factories act, 1948, read with rule 4 of the bombay factories rules, 1950. the appeal raises an important question-of construction of clause (k) (1) and clause (m) of section 2 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR1021
..... the respondent who was the accused in that case and was charged under s. 21(1)(iv)(b) of the factories act, 1948. the case against the accused was that he being the manager of the jubilee mills, a factory as defined by s. 2(m)(i) of the factories act, 1948, failed to securely fence the shaft and pulleys of the carding department of the said ..... .(8) now, in this case it is not disputed by the respondent that the jubilee mill was a factory within the meaning of the factories act, 1948 and the shaftg and pulleys in question were a part of the transmission machinery witthin the meaning of the act. it is, therefore, clear that by reason of the provisions of section 21(1)(iv) the shaft and ..... factory which formed part of the transmission machinery and thereby contravened the provisions of s. 21(1)(iv)(b) of the factories act and committed an offence punishable under s. 92 ..... of the said act.(2) in the last week of march .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 97(1995)CCR377; (1997)IIILLJ1145Bom
..... time. the management of the india security press had taken a stand that the concerned workmen were not entitled to over time payment under the provisions of the factories act, 1948. the workmen made application before the presiding officer, central government labour. court claiming such benefits and the applications were allowed. though the said orders were challenged before ..... was led by both sides before the labour court. 9. upon these pleadings, the labour court concluded that the respondent workmen were 'workers' within the meaning of factories act. 1948, that they were entitled to claim over-time wages at double the ordinary rate for the relevant period. being aggrieved thereby, the petitioners are before this court to ..... and another in which the clerical and administrative work is carried out. both buildings are located within the premises covered by the factory licence in respect of the factories which is registered under the provisions of the factories act, 1948. in the present writ petitions we are concerned with the workmen styled by the petitioners as 'non-industrial workmen'. 4. ..... with the provisions of section 59 of the factories act, 1948. 7. before the labour court, the respondent workmen pleaded that they were working in the telecom factory registered under the factories act, that the provisions of section 59 of the factories act, 1948 were applicable to them as they were covered under the provisions of the factories act, that several such applications had been allowed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(2)BomCR883
..... 18. the dearth that is perceived in cases such as the present is not of the existence of legislation, but of the implementation of legislative standards. the factories act, 1948 contains detailed provisions for ensuring the welfare of workers and for guarding against unhygienic and dangerous conditions of work. special provisions have been made for regulating hazardous processes. ..... of legislation enacted by the parliament and by state legislative bodies in india. there is no dearth of carefully conceived labour welfare laws. section 2(cb) of the factories' act, 1948 defines the expression 'hazardous process' as follows:(cb) 'hazardous process' means any process or activity in relation to an industry specified in the first schedule where, ..... to inspect and assess industries for regulatory compliance. the situation is alarming. unless regulatory authorities vested with the duty of ensuring compliance with welfare legislation such as the factories' act, 1948, possess trained man power, the object of enacting such legislation is defeated.the right to health:14. the constitution guarantees the right to life under article 21 ..... monsanto also records that it paid ex-gratia. monsanto has stated before the court that it has all the requisite statutory permissions including those under the factories act, 1948 and the insecticides act, 1968. no complaint was made by the petitioner to any of the authorities constituted under the governing statutes in india. monsanto states before the court that .....Tag this Judgment!