Advanced Search Results

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, … authorities like the powers of 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 this power Central Government in consultation with Central

N. Chandra Shaker and Others Vs. the Ordnance Factories Board, Rep. by ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

Subject : Education

institutes. As per the Apprenticeship Rules, 1992, issued in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 37 of Apprentice Act, 1961, both the trades of Mechanic (Motor Vehicle) and Driver-cum-Fitter are listed as designated trades. … the ITI course in Motor Mechanic Trade. They joined Ordnance Factory as Apprentices and underwent apprenticeship training from 31.3.1996 to 30.3.1998. They passed in the … in the trade of Driver-cum-Fitter was the same as that of Mechanic Motor Vehicle. As per the Apprenticeship Act, 1961, both the trades are distinct from each other and are separate trades. The apprentice training pass certificate was

M.C. Mehta Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 - Sections 3 and 17; Constitution of India - Articles 24, 32, 37, 39, 41, 45 and 47; Factories Act, 1948 - Sections 67; Plantation Labour Act, 1951 - Sections 24; Merchant Shipping Act, 1951 - Sections 109; Mines Act, 1952 - Sections 45; Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 - Sections 21; Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 3; Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 - Sections 1(3), 2 and 14; Employment of Children Act, 1938

Reported in : 1996IXAD(SC)582; AIR1997SC699; (1997)3GLR2306; (1997)IILLJ724SC; 1996(9)SCALE42; (1996)6SCC756; [1996]Supp9SCR726; 1997(1)LC243(SC)

shall be required or allowed to work in any capacity in any motor transport undertaking.(vi) Section 3 of Apprentices Act, 1961:Qualifications for being engaged as an apprentice : A person shall not be qualified for being engaged as … Workers Child Workers to total workers Slate Mandsaur, 12,000 1,000 8.3 Pencil Madhya Pradesh State Markapur 15,000 app. 3750 25 Andhra Pradesh Diamond Surat, cutting Gujarat 100,000 15,000 15 Agate- Cambay, Gujarat 30,000 not --- cutting known

Rai Saheb Rekhchand Mohota Spg. and Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2006)5SOT561(Mum.)

allowing the expenses incurred for the training of Shri Vinay Kumar Mohota under section 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 being Rs. 1,27,526 in assessment year t989-90 and Rs. 81,387 in assessment year 1990-91.Briefly stated, the facts of … company agreed to pay a maximum of US$ 15,000 per year during this period of five years of apprenticeship. It was also provided in the agreement that Mr.Mohota will join the assessee-company after his return from abroad

Textool Co. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1984)9ITD820(Mad.)

Bonus Act was within the scope of that Act because the trainees were not apprentices employed under the Apprentices Act, 1961, who alone would be excluded from the Payment of Bonus Act and all the employees were receiving emoluments … Section 36(1)(ii) of the Act as bonus other than bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act or under Section 37 of the 1965 Act as expenditure laid out for the purpose of business. The assessee has rightly placed

M.P. Agricultural Corpn. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Nagpur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1994)49ITD679(Nag.)

and exclusively" used in Section 10(2)(xv) of the I.T. Act, 1922 corresponding to Section 37 of the I.T. Act, 1961, does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily it is for the assessee to decide whether an expenditure should be incurred … English and French as special subjects. She worked in the editorial department from September 1955, starting as an apprentice. In 1960, by a special resolution passed by the Directors she was sent to United States of America

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, … he must be working in one or other capacities mentioned in the definition. The court held in paragraph 37 of the judgment as under:-'37. In case any person raised a contention that his status has been changed

Regional Director, E.S.i.C. Vs. Golden Gate Restaurant

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - Sections 2(9)

Reported in : [2002(92)FLR1078]; (2002)ILLJ972Bom

portion reads as under: [Or any person engaged as an apprentice, not being an apprentice engaged under the Apprentices Act, 1961, (52 of 1961) or under the Standing Orders of the establishment; but docs not include-] (a) any member … employer for two different periods viz. January 1980 to October 1982 qua 37 persons and April 15, 1983 to August 1985 qua seven persons. 2. … order dated December 20, 1996 passed by the Employees' Insurance Court, Mumbai in exercise of its powers under Section 75 of the Act in the two separate Applications filed by the Respondent-Restaurant to challenge the orders passed

M/s Express Publications (madurai) Private Limited Vs. Union Of India

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

justifiably have embarked on an exercise as to whether the respondent was in effect a “trainee” under the Apprentices Act, 1961, or a “workman” within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the 1947 Act. There is nothing on record … 45 and 47 of the judgment. P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.speaking for the Bench has observed as follows: (SCC pp. 37-39) “45. While directing that appointments, temporary or casual, be regularised or made permanent, the courts are swayed by

State of Gujarat Vs. Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 6 and 18; Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 2 and 25F; Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : [2004(102)FLR347]; (2004)1GLR885

respondent workman was not a workman appointed by the petitioner but he was appointed as Apprentice under the Apprentices Act, 1961. Learned AGP Mr. Dave submitted that the workman appointed under Section 6 of the Apprentices Act on date … favour of the respondent workman.4. Lastly, learned AGP Mr. H.D. Dave for the petitioner while pointing out page 37 of the petition, has contended that the contract so executed is not required to be registered being the