Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the industrial disputes act 1947 Court: mumbai aurangabad Page 1 of about 72 results (0.015 seconds)

May 03 2014 (HC)

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and Another Vs. Syed Sahe ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... , there ought to be pleadings as well as prayers praying for such declaration in the memo of the complaint under the ulp act, 1971 or in the statement of claim under the industrial disputes act, 1947 (here-in-after referred to as ida, 1947?). the pleadings are complete with the filing of the written statement by the employer and by reserving the right to conduct a ..... is quashed and set aside by the labour court in such circumstances what employer would prove before the labour court? in my opinion both the labour court and the industrial court have acted properly and have taken a pragmatic view of the matter and both rightly did not enter into time wasting procedure of proving the so called misconduct before the labour ..... , before taking up other issues. it is an anathema to decide the first two issues together with the other issues. whenever, in proceedings under the mrtu and pulp act, 1971 or the ida, 1947, a domestic/departmental enquiry is under challenge with pleadings and substantive prayers seeking the quashing of the domestic enquiry on the ground of either non-observance of the ..... to justify the action of dismissal on the ground that the charge of late coming was not disputed or denied by the employee but was admitted by him in his replies to the memos served upon him by the trust. in these circumstances the industrial court agreed with the order of the labour court to interfere with the punishment of dismissal and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2014 (HC)

Sumanbai Bhaurao Shinde Vs. Marathwada Agricultural University, Parbha ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... years with respondent. let us now examine whether respondent ?? university is duty bound to provide reemployment to the petitioner by adhering to the provisions of section 25h of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and rule 82 of the rules framed thereunder by directly appointing her on the post of majdoor on time scale as per advertisement dated 26.8.2009. 14] notice ..... are explicit and express, admitting no exception. principle of fair play and justice is incorporated by the legislature by enacting section 25h of the industrial disputes act, 1947. 13] it is worthwhile to note that section 25h of the industrial disputes act is a piece of welfare legislation and is couched in wide language. it is trite that the courts are required to adopt a beneficial ..... is framed to prescribe the manner in which the employer is required to give opportunity for reemployment to the retrenched employee. on harmonious reading of section 25h of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and rule 82 framed thereunder, position which boils down is that whenever the employer intends to fill up the vacancies with him, he is required to give an opportunity ..... worked on daily rated establishment with respondent ?? university from the year 1981 to 1.4.2001 when she was retrenched by issuing a notice u/s 25f of the industrial disputes act, 1947. challenge to that retrenchment notice vide writ petition no.5202/2006 failed. similarly, the parties are at adidem on the point that the petitioner is a project affected person .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 30 2015 (HC)

Chandrakala and Others Vs. Marathwada Medical Research and Rural Devel ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... labour emerges. 112. the decision of the constitution bench of this court in basti sugar mill's case (supra), was given in the context of reference of an industrial dispute under the uttar pradesh industrial disputes act, 1947. the appellant-sugar mills entrusted the work of removal of press-mud to a contractor who engaged the respondents therein (contract labour) in connection with that work. the ..... mark of the respondent. (q) the attendance record is fabricated. (r) the petitioners are not remedyless as they can raise an industrial dispute under section 2a or section 2(k) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 for the redressal of their grievance. (s) an industrial dispute in this backdrop can be considered by the appropriate government and the true employer of the petitioners can be identified. (t) the ..... principal employer is the real employer. the petitions are, therefore, dismissed. 35. in the event, the petitioners raise an industrial dispute before the appropriate government under the industrial disputes act, 1947 within a period of six weeks from today, the time spent by the petitioners before the industrial court and this court shall be a ground for condonation of delay, if any. all contentions of the litigating .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2013 (HC)

Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Ltd. Through Its Chief Engi ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... and pulp act. he is working in a clear vacant permanent post. the respondent board has made regular appointment of telephone operators at various other places except the ..... is effectively done by the learned judge, industrial court in the body of judgment. it is extracted below by supplying the headings thereto. 22] summary of complaint:- "4. according to the complainant, he is neither a registered contractor, nor a contract labour. he is a workman covered within section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (id act) and section 3(5) of the mrtu ..... the rival pleadings before the industrial court, it is evident and can be noted is that the complainants' status as a person doing work as workmen ..... and found the fact that the respondents were actually undertaking the job is not in dispute. therefore, on this simple and plain proposition, it is prima facie made out that the status of complainants on facts is that of workmen u/s 2(s) of the industrial disputes act. this fact was rather an indisputable or undisputed fact. 31] from the language employed in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2015 (HC)

Raghunath Ambadas Hatgale and Others Vs. The Divisional Controller and ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... by the petitioners and there is no explanation whatsoever in their statements of claims as to what were the circumstances that precluded them from approaching the industrial dispute resolution machinery under the industrial disputes act, 1947. i would advert to this issue later in this judgment. 19. it is settled law that the employee has to prove the factum of appointment ..... to be working from january, 1988 and was orally terminated on 31.12.1990. 6. all these three petitioners issued demand notices under section 2a of the industrial disputes act, 1947 on 31.05.2010 claiming reinstatement with continuity and full backwages. since the conciliation failed, the appropriate government passed the order of reference on 17.03.2011, by ..... reference dated 21.03.2006 issued by the deputy commissioner of labour, aurangabad under section 10 of the industrial disputes act, 1947. it was claimed that the reference of the purported dispute itself is unsustainable since few workers had raised an industrial dispute after 18 years of their disengagement. a group of about 1500 workers was involved in these cases and ..... bank ltd. (supra), assistant executive engineer, karnataka (supra), haryana state cooperative land development bank (supra), dgm ongc (supra) and other reports while deciding whether, the industrial dispute could be said to have been existing. 30. the division bench recorded the contention of the petitioner/management and more importantly in paragraph 13, that the petitioner company had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 2015 (HC)

Dnyaneshwar Vs. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Works Division and ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... each case. upon the expiry of a period of 30 days from the date of the publication of the award, the award becomes enforceable under section 17a of the industrial disputes act, 1947. the supreme court has held that when the award becomes enforceable, the labour court becomes functus officio upon which it is bereft of the jurisdiction to entertain an ..... 2. the issue raised before me is as to when would the labour court / tribunal be rendered functus officio ? under the industrial disputes act, 1947 and the industrial disputes (bombay) rules, 1957. 3. though this case reveals peculiar facts, there is no dispute with regard to the facts pertaining to ref.(ida) no.90/1996, which are recorded as under: a. the petitioner was engaged ..... division bench held that the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act, 1963 would apply to an application to be filed under rule 26 since there was nothing in the industrial disputes act, 1947 to exclude the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act. the court held that the industrial disputes act, 1947 would constitute a special law within the meaning of section 29(2) ..... learned agp are united in submitting that under rule 26 r/w rule 31a of the industrial disputes (bombay) rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the rules) and section 17 and 17a of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the central act), the labour court or the industrial tribunal, as the case may be, is rendered functus officio ? after 30 days from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 15 2015 (HC)

Shaikh Jamir Sayed Saifoddin Vs. The Chief Officer, The Municipal Coun ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... 29. insofar as the contention of the petitioner before the labour court is concerned, i am of the view that section 25g of the industrial disputes act, 1947 is not attracted in the peculiar facts of this case, much less section 25n since the cancellation of the appointment order of the petitioner would ..... service of the respondent, inasmuch as, the respondent will have to be covered by the definition of industrial establishment under section 25l so as to attract section 25n of the industrial disputes act, 1947. similarly, the respondent will have to fall within the definition of a manufacturing process under section 2(k ..... ) and a factory under section 2(m) of the factories act. moreover, the number of workers engaged at its establishment ..... complaint by the impugned judgment dated 31.07.2012. 8. the petitioner preferred revision (ulp) no.52/2012 which was dismissed by the industrial court vide judgment dated 24.06.2013. 9. mrs.ansari, learned advocate for the petitioner, submits that the government resolution dated 26.10.1994 ..... should be 100 or more. 31. in the light of the above, i do not find that the labour court or the industrial court have committed any error in dismissing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 2015 (HC)

Mangalbai Jaspalsinh Bayas Vs. The State of Maharashtra Through its Se ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... up alternate remedy. rule accordingly. no order as to costs. ? 14. it is thus settled that the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 ( the said act ?) and industrial disputes act, 1947 act applies to the petitioner. 15. this court has also considered the said aspect in the case of dy.chief officer (child welfare), zilla parishad, ahmednagar vs. smt. ratan ..... 'industry' within the meaning of definition of 'industry' as per section 2(j) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. we have no doubt that icds scheme is systematic activity in which there is cooperation between employer and employee. we also find that the ..... scheme, we are of the view that the anganwadi sevikas and anganwadi helpers and in particular the present petitioner are 'workman' within the meaning of section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and the scheme under which they are performing their work, nature of which has already been given by us above is nothing but an ..... remedy which is available more speedily under the provisions of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labor practices act, 1971. we also would like to add that the pendency of the cases in the labor and industrial courts in the state of maharashtra and in particular in the areas other than mumbai and greater mumbai has considerably reduced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 2015 (HC)

Barkunbai Dadarao Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra Through its Secr ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... up alternate remedy. rule accordingly. no order as to costs. ? 14. it is thus settled that the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 ( the said act ?) and industrial disputes act, 1947 act applies to the petitioner. 15. this court has also considered the said aspect in the case of dy.chief executive officer (child welfare), zilla parishad, ahmednagar vs. smt ..... 'industry' within the meaning of definition of 'industry' as per section 2(j) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. we have no doubt that icds scheme is systematic activity in which there is cooperation between employer and employee. we also find that the ..... scheme, we are of the view that the anganwadi sevikas and anganwadi helpers and in particular the present petitioner are 'workman' within the meaning of section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and the scheme under which they are performing their work, nature of which has already been given by us above is nothing but an ..... remedy which is available more speedily under the provisions of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labor practices act, 1971. we also would like to add that the pendency of the cases in the labor and industrial courts in the state of maharashtra and in particular in the areas other than mumbai and greater mumbai has considerably reduced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 2015 (HC)

Vasant Manaji Kamble Vs. The Chairman, Bhaskar Pandurang Hiwale Educat ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... salary drawn by the complainants. on the face of it, the complainants do not appears to be workman and consequently an employee as per the definition under industrial disputes act, 1947 and mrtu and pulp act, 1971. in fact on this sole ground, the complaint filed by the complainants is not maintainable and this court also do not get jurisdiction to try ..... staff working under him. both the complainants were engaged in the administrative / supervisory category and therefore they are not workmen within the meaning of section 2(s) of industrial disputes act, 1947 and the complaint filed by them is not legal and maintainable. 18. the complainant no.2 during the course of his cross examination made a statement that his ..... that the entire complaint was not maintainable since both the complainants did not fall within the definition of workman ? under section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. he, therefore, submits that once the industrial court came to a conclusion that the complaint was not tenable, it lost jurisdiction and could not have exercised jurisdiction by going into the contentions ..... complainant being a workman ? under section 2(s) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 and an employee ? under section 3(5) of the the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 ( the said act ?) and the respondent being an industry ? under section 2(j) of the industrial disputes act, 1947. 15. paragraphs 7 and 18 of the impugned judgment read as .....

Tag this Judgment!


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