Advanced Search Results

Holy Family English Medium L.P. School and Others Vs. Employees State ...

Court : Kerala

Subject : Education

employee under Section 2 (e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act (before amendment of the Act in the year 2009) reads as follows: (e) employee … of gratuity to the teachers. Accordingly, the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Bill, 2007 was introduced in Lok Sabha on the November 26, 2007 and same … with the work of the establishment; (ii) 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. 26. Meaning of the term … by them under any circumstance; that Teachers are not liable to be considered as employees as defined under Section 2(9) of the Act and thus seeking to set aside the notice/proceedings issued by the authorities of the ESI

Shamaraja Udupa Vs. the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Mangalore and O ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Education

Section 2 defines the term ‘employee’. It reads as under: (e) “employee” means any person (other than an apprentice) who is employed for wages, whether the terms of such employment are express or implied, in any kind … in the context of the definition of an employee prior to the amendment. Section 2(e) is now substituted by Act 47 of 2009, which came … to set aside the order passed in the Writ Petition No.11362 of 2007 dated 02-08-2007.) 1. The question of law that arises for consideration in … on the ground that the petitioner does not fall within the definition of an employee as defined under Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, for short, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’. Aggrieved by the

Birla Institute of Technology Vs. The State of Jharkhand

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Education

as it stood then. The definition reads as under: “2. (e) ‘employee’ means any person (other than an apprentice) employed on wages, in any establishment, factory, mine, oilfield, 9 plantation, port, railway company or shop, to do … as defined under Section 2(e) was accordingly amended with effect from 03.04.1997 retrospectively vide Payment of the Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009 (No.47 of 2009) published on 31.12.2009. The amended definition reads as under: “(e) “employee” means any person … by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in LPA No.53 of 2007 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the LPA filed

St. Xavier s H.S. School Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, through its Chief ...

Court : Chhattisgarh

Subject : Education

of gratuity to the teachers. Accordingly, the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Bill, 2007 was introduced in Lok Sabha on the 26th November, 2007 and same … holding inter-alia that definition of employee has been amended with effect from 3.4.1997 by the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009 and therefore, he is entitled for amount of gratuity payable by the petitioner s Institution and accordingly, … which provides as under:- 2(e) employee means any person (other than an apprentice) employed on wages, in any establishment, factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port, railway … is whether teacher of fully aided educational institution can be held to be employee within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1972 ) to enable

M/s. Bharti Airtel Limited Vs. A.s. Raghavendra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : MRTP

S.K. Verma [(1983) 4 SCC214:1983. SCC (L&S) 510]. .22. The Constitution Bench further took notice of the subsequent amendment in the definition of ‘workman’ and held that even the legislature impliedly did not accept the said interpretation … South - Graphic Communication Group in Kodak India Private Limited from June, 2007 till the date of making the application; in Xerox India as “Corporate … case [(2004) 8 SCC387:2004. SCC (L&S) 1128]. , the question arose whether the appellant, who was appointed as Apprentice Development Officer, could be treated as a workman. While dealing with the said question, the three-Judge Bench referred … However, on 27.06.2013, brushing aside the appellant’s objections that the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the “ID Act”) was not applicable in … not a “workman”, within the 3 meaning of Section 2(s)1, ID Act, the “appropriate Government”2 [herein, the

K.K.Velayudhan vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

amendment of the presidential Order in terms of WP(C) No. 12639 of 2019 :6:the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2007 which received the assent of the President on 29 th August , 2007 and was published in the … documents including Exts P1 and P2 caste certificate issued by the 6th respondent. Petitioner was recruited as an apprentice in the 7th respondent factory in general quota and was absorbed in the regular post of Machinist-B w.e.f. … WP(C) No. 12639 of 2019 :4: preferred as per the provisions of Section 13 of the Kerala (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe) Regulation of Issue … ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 12639 OF 2019 PETITIONER: K.K.VELAYUDHAN AGED

Kovuri Rajalingam Vs. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Mines Act, 1952 - Sections 40; Mines Rules; Mines Regulations; Mines (Amendment) Act, 1983; Apprentices Act, 1961 - Sections 2, 43

Reported in : 2009(5)ALT480

to work.Explanation.-In this section and in Section 43, 'apprentice' means an apprentice as defined in Clause (a) of Section 2 of the Apprentices Act, 1961).The petitioner joined the services of the 1st respondent Company on 24.04.1965. As on … provision, no person can work in the mines, who is underage.9. Indisputably, after the commencement of the Mines (Amendment) Act, 1983, no person below 18 years of age shall be allowed to work in any mine or part … also been issued on the even date vide WPMP No. 11193 of 2007.3. The respondents entered appearance and moved WVMP No. 311 of 2009 with

The Mathrubhumi Printing and Publishing Vs. The Employees State Insura ...

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

applicant challenged the said notices before the Employees' Insurance Court contending that the persons engaged as trainees are apprentices engaged in accordance with the standing orders applicable to the establishment and, therefore, they are not liable to … Issue No.(i): The definition of 'employee' contained in Section 2(9) of the Act which stood prior to the amendment brought to the Section by virtue of Act 18 of 2010, reads thus: "'employee' means any person employed … JUDGMENT The decision of the Employees' Insurance Court, Palakkad in I.C.No.40 of 2007 is under challenge in this appeal. The applicant in the proceedings is

The Mathrubhumi Printing and Publishing Vs. The Employees State Insura ...

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

applicant challenged the said notices before the Employees' Insurance Court contending that the persons engaged as trainees are apprentices engaged in accordance with the standing orders applicable to the establishment and, therefore, they are not liable to … Issue No.(i): The definition of 'employee' contained in Section 2(9) of the Act which stood prior to the amendment brought to the Section by virtue of Act 18 of 2010, reads thus: "'employee' means any person employed … JUDGMENT The decision of the Employees' Insurance Court, Palakkad in I.C.No.40 of 2007 is under challenge in this appeal. The applicant in the proceedings is

The Mathrubhumi Printing and Publishing Vs. The Employees State Insura ...

Court : Kerala

Subject : Land Acquisition

applicant challenged the said notices before the Employees' Insurance Court contending that the persons engaged as trainees are apprentices engaged in accordance with the standing orders applicable to the establishment and, therefore, they are not liable to … Issue No.(i): The definition of 'employee' contained in Section 2(9) of the Act which stood prior to the amendment brought to the Section by virtue of Act 18 of 2010, reads thus: "'employee' means any person employed … JUDGMENT The decision of the Employees' Insurance Court, Palakkad in I.C.No.40 of 2007 is under challenge in this appeal. The applicant in the proceedings is