Advanced Search Results

Virender Singh Vs. Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd., Through the Manag ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2, 10 and 25F; Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 4(1), 4(4), 5, 7, 18, 22, 22(1), 33(2) and 33C(2); Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : [2005(105)FLR1159]; (2005)IILLJ856P& H; (2005)139PLR830

the said order is in violation of the Certified Standing Orders pf the respondent-Corporation, by virtue of which Apprentices Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961) would apply to the trainee. The petitioner then places reliance … order dated 17.5.2001. It is his positive case that no retrenchment compensation in accordance with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act was paid to him. The petitioner further avers that in a writ … kept out of service. Constrained, thus, he moved an application under Section 33(c)(2) of the Act of 1947 for grant of wages which was allowed.

U.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Shri Shiv Mohan Singh and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 2, 2(9), 3, 5, 4(1), 4(4), 4(5), 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26(1), 26(2), 29, 30, 31 and 37; Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2(I) and 4K; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 6(N) and 25(F); Indian Boilers Act, 1923; Apprenticeship Rules, 1992 - Rules 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14; Army Act, 1950; Air Force Act, 1950; Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934; Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970; Apprenticeship Rules, 1962 - Rules 4B and 6; Contract Act - Sections 23

Reported in : AIR2004SC5009; JT2004(8)SC272; 2004(3)KLT686(SC); (2005)ILLJ117SC; 2004(8)SCALE475; (2004)8SCC402; (2005)1UPLBEC175

disposed of by common order.2. The main question involved in these appeals is what is the scope of Apprentices Act, 1961 vis a vis the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Indian Boilers Act, … the Apprenticeship Adviser, Powers of entry, inspection, etc. Offences and penalties, etc. 33. Section 37 deals with the power to make rules. In exercise of … intended to give effect to these objectives.' Now we shall examine the necessary provisions of the Act. 5. Section 2 deals with the definition. Section 2(aa) defines 'apprentice' which means a person who is undergoing apprenticeship training

Ram Dular Paswan and ors. Vs. P.O., Labour Court and ors.

Court : Patna

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2 and 33A; Apprentice Act, 1961

specified above. No cost. A.K. Prasad, J. I agree. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 2(s) and 33-A - Apprentices Act, 1961, Sections 2(aa), 3, 4, 6, 7 and 18--'Apprentice', although is included in definition of workmen, as contained in … R.A. Sharma, J. 1. The petitioners in these writ applications filed complaints under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the I.D.Act) before the Labour Court. Bokaro

Mukesh K. Tripathi Vs. Sr. Divisional Manager, L.i.C. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2, 25F and 64; Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960; ;Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 4(1), 4(2) and 18; Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Act, 1946

Reported in : AIR2004SC4179; 2004(4)AWC3088(SC); JT2004(7)SC232; (2004)IIILLJ740SC; RLW2004(4)SC556; 2004(7)SCALE442; (2004)8SCC387; 2005(1)SLJ112(SC); (2004)3UPLBEC2632

matter from another angle, viz., the appointment of the Appellant as an apprentice under the Scheme vis-a-vis the Apprentices Act, 1961.27. The expression 'Apprentice' has been included in the definition of 'workman' contained in Section 2(s) of the Industrial

Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Arvind Mills Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Insurance

Acts : Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - Sections 2(2), 2(9), 2(22), 45A and 82; Apprenticeship Act, 1961; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 5 and 12; Workmen's Compensation Act - Sections 30; B.I.R. Act, 1946; Employees' State Insurance General Regulations, 1950 - Regulation 40

Reported in : [2009(121)FLR1015]; (2009)1GLR834; (2009)IVLLJ198Guj

the factory or establishment or any person engaged as an apprentice, not being an apprentice engaged under the Apprentices Act, 1961 (Act No. LII of 1961), or under the Standing Orders of the establishment; but does not include'.5.1. The … as under:4(a) In light of the facts of present case and in view of statutory provisions contained in Section 2(9) of the E.S.I. Act, whether E.S.I. Court is right and justified in interpreting 'or' as 'and' and

Radha Kishan Sharma and ors. Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation and a ...

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Reported in : 1986(2)WLN561

According to the case of the Corporation it had no authority to appoint persons as apprentices, as the Apprentices Act, 1961 is not applicable to the appointment of the petitioners. it is also the case of the Corporation that … may be stated that under the order Annexure-1 dated September 11, 1978, 33 candidates were appointed as Apprentices, Junior Assistant/Typists on the fixed stipend of … on the ground that the Corporation is an industry and the petitioners are workmen within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the ID Act). Their services were terminated in contravention

Mahesh Chand Vs. Mgt. of M/S Le Meridien

Court : Delhi

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but by reason of a subsequent parliamentary legislation, namely, the Apprentices Act, 1961 (the 1961 Act), the term apprentice has been defined in Section 2(aa) to mean a person who is … Bench decision of this Court in Management of Apparel Export Promotion Council Vs. Surya Prakash, (2011) III LLJ 33.(Delhi), which had not been taken note of by the Court in the decision in Delhi Cantonment Board (supra).

Ramesh Chand Vs. Mgt. of M/S Le Meridien

Court : Delhi

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but by reason of a subsequent parliamentary legislation, namely, the Apprentices Act, 1961 (the 1961 Act), the term apprentice has been defined in Section 2(aa) to mean a person who is … Bench decision of this Court in Management of Apparel Export Promotion Council Vs. Surya Prakash, (2011) III LLJ 33.(Delhi), which had not been taken note of by the Court in the decision in Delhi Cantonment Board (supra).

Chairman-cum-managing Director, Fertilizer Corporation of India Limite ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Sections 2, 2(1), 4(1), 7(4), 7(7), 13, 18 and 103; Payment of Gratuity (Central) Rules - Rules 10(2) and 17; Apprentice Act, 1961 - Sections 2; Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - Sections 2(9) and 2(22); Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2; Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1965; Payment of Wages Act; Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970; Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952; Air force Act, 1950; Army Act, 1950; Navy Act, 1957; Factories Act, 1948 - Sections 67; Labour Law; Indian Contract Act

Reported in : 2005(2)ESC1547

under a statutory obligation. In that case, the apex court considered the term 'apprentice' under the scheme, vis-a-vis Apprentices Act 1961. The court also considered the definition of workman as contained in Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

Sri Niwas Vs. Mgt. of M/S Le Meridien

Court : Delhi

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but by reason of a subsequent parliamentary legislation, namely, the Apprentices Act, 1961 (the 1961 Act), the term apprentice has been defined in Section 2(aa) to mean a person who is … Bench decision of this Court in Management of Apparel Export Promotion Council Vs. Surya Prakash, (2011) III LLJ 33.(Delhi), which had not been taken note of by the Court in the decision in Delhi Cantonment Board (supra).