Advanced Search Results

Youth, for Unity and Voluntary Action (Yuva) Vs. State of Maharashtra ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14, 32 and 226; Bombay Revenue Jurisdication Act, 1976 - Sections 11; Town Planning Act; Bombay Municipal Corporation Act; Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969; Maharashtra Land Revenue Code - Sections 50

Reported in : AIR1991Bom60; 1990(3)BomCR476; (1990)92BOMLR411; 1991(1)MhLj504

Advocate for Respondent : V.A. Gangal, ;N.M. Kachare, Assistanat Govt. Pleaders and ;L.C. Chogle, Adv.

ORDERBharucha, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal impugns the orders passed by Sharad Manoher J. on 7th March, 1990 and 7th April, 1990 while the First Appeal (F.A. No. 108 of 1987) was pending before him. Thereby...

Mumbai Shramik Sangh and ors. Vs. N.D. Rathod, Conciliation Officer an ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 12(3) and 18(3); Bombay Rules

Reported in : 1992(1)BomCR49; (1995)ILLJ273Bom

Advocate for Respondent : L.C. Chogle, Adv. for Respondent No. 1, ;P.K. Rele and ;Sanjay Udeshi, Advs., i/b., Haresh Mehta and Co. for Respondent No. 2 and ;N.M. Ganguli, Adv. for Respondent No. 3

A.V. Sawant, J.1. The petitioner - Mumbai Shramik Sangh -has by this petition challenged the settlement arrived at on November 25, 1987 under Section 12(3) read with Section 18(3) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (for...

Supply Commissioner's Office Employees (Class Iii) Union Vs. State of ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service

Acts : Maharashtra Civil Services (General Condition of Services) Rules, 1981 - Rule 27

Reported in : 1988(3)BomCR83

Advocate for Respondent : L.C. Chogle and ; B.E. Patil, Advs.

Sujata Manohar, J.1. This petition is filed on behalf of 32 employees in the Supply Commissioner's Office. The names of these employees are set out in paragraph 2 of the petition.2. The office of the Supply...

Mohan Madhukar Ghate and ors. Vs. N.D. Rathod and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2, 12 and 18(3); Industrial Disputes (Bombay) Rules, 1956 - Rule 62; Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971

Reported in : 1991(2)BomCR376; (1993)IIILLJ384Bom

Advocate for Respondent : L.C. Chogle, Adv. for R-1 to 6, ;J.C. Gadkari, Adv. for R-2, 3 and 4 and ;P.K. Rele and ;A.M. Vernekar, Advs. for R-5

D.R. Dhanuka. J. 1. The petitioners are employees of M/s. Glindia Ltd., Respondent No. 5 in this petition. The petitioners are members of Glaxo Laboratories Employees' Union, a Union duly recognised under Section 12 of the...

Nowroji Jehangir Gamadia and ors. Vs. Deputy Collector, Inami and Spec ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Trusts and Societies

Acts : Bombay City (Inami and Special Tenures) Abolition and Maharashtra Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 1969 - Sections 4(2) and 19; Bombay City (Inami and Special Tenures) Abolition Rules, 1972 - Rule 14

Reported in : AIR1986Bom373; 1987(3)BomCR119; 1986MhLJ582

Advocate for Respondent : L.C. Chogle and;B.E. Patil, Advs.

Shah, J.1. In all these matters a common question of law as to the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Bombay City (Inami and Special Tenures) Abolition and Maharashtra Land Revenue Code...

Vinayak Dashrath Sontakkey (Dr.) Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 309 and 311

Reported in : 1990(1)BomCR280

Advocate for Respondent : N.H. Gursahani and ;L.C. Chogle, Advs.

S.M. Daud, J.1. Petitioner, a Deputy Director of Health Services, invokes Article 226 to protect and further his career in the Public Health Department of the State of Maharashtra.2. Petitioner and three others while holding different...

Shree Jaya Mahal Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. M/S. Zenith Che ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Property

Acts : Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 7 and 23; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : AIR1991Bom211; 1991(3)BomCR201; (1991)93BOMLR881

Advocate for Respondent : B.G. Vaidya and ;L.C. Chogle, Advs.

ORDER1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution take exception to an order passed by the then Minister of State for Agriculture and Co-operation -- being respondent No. 2 to the petitions -- purporting to...

Maliram Gauridutt Mittal and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Sections 178

Reported in : 1991(3)BomCR404

Advocate for Respondent : L.C. Chogle, Adv. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in W.P. Nos. 542, 1113, 1118, 1119 and 1207 of 86, ;A.R. Shinde, Adv. in W.P. No. 1205 of 86 and ;C.U. Bora, Adv. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in W.P. No.

S.M. Daud, J.1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution take exception to the respondents purporting to re-fix the rent of the plots figuring in the petitions and threatening to recover the same along with...

N.B. Shukla Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 12, 226, 311, 311(2), 512, 514, 521 and 522(1); Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 - Sections 11; Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Sections 83 and 88; Industrial Disputes Act; Income-tax Act; Madhya Pradesh Government Servants (Temporary and Quasi-Permanent Service) Rules, 1960 - Rule 12; Medical Act, 1858

Reported in : (1979)ILLJ291Bom

1. The important question that arises in this petitioner is whether the order terminating the service of the petitioner amounts to dismissal by way of punishment or whether it is a discharge from service simpliciter. It...