Chennai Court December 2004 Judgments
Belmaks Metal Works Vs. the Member Secretary, Pondichery Pollution Con ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: (2005)1MLJ441
ORDERMarkandey Katju, C.J. 1. The petitioner prays for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for quashing the dated 22-11-2004 passed by the respondent and to grant 'Air Consent Order' under Sec. 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and 'Water Consent Order' under Sec. 25 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 to enable the petitioner to operate the Electroplating Plant after conducting the inspection of the Electroplating Plant and the Effluent Treatment Plant and based on the No Objection Certificate dated 22-3-2002.2. Heard Shri T.S. Sivagnanam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri T. Murugesan, learned senior counsel/Government Pleader for Pondichery. 3. It is averred in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of bi-cycle parts and automobile spares and their business activities are spread throughout the country, particularly at Faridabad. They established ...
Tag this Judgment!The Perundurai Citizens Welfare Society Rep. by Its President K.P. Par ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC721; (2005)1MLJ252
ORDERMarkandey Katju, C.J.1. These two writ petitions are being disposed off by this common judgment.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. We have perused the records in the above two writ petitions.3. The writ petitions relate to allegations of pollution by Tanneries.4. W.P.No.15244 of 2004 has been filed praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the Consent Order dated 16.8.2002 issued by the first respondent/Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board in favour of the 2nd respondent/The Perundari Leather Industries Eco Security Private Limited (hereinafter called 'PLIES').5. W.P.No. 1682 of 2003 has been filed praying that no tanneries should be set up in and around Perundurai, as it would cause damage to the drinking water, as well as water used for agriculture purposes.6. The petitioner in W.P.No. 15244 of 2004 claims to be a Welfare Society registered under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. It is alleged in paragraph-3 of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd., Rep. by Its Managin ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Mad232; II(2005)BC79; 2004(5)CTC689; (2005)1MLJ263
ORDERMarkandey Katju, C.J.1. This writ appeal is filed against the impugned order of the learned single Judge dated 19.5.2004 passed in W.P. No. 14013 of 2004. We have perused the impugned order and the other papers available on record, and also heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained.2. The prayer in the writ petition was for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent in the writ petition (the present appellant), which is the Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as TIIC) to accept the one time settlement offer made by the petitioner and to release the properties and fixed assets offered as collateral securities.3. The writ petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act and is engaged in the business of Software Development Projects. A term loan of Rs. 2.60 crores was sanctioned to the writ petitioner-company by the TIIC v...
Tag this Judgment!K. Raman and ors. Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC759
ORDERA. Kulasekaran , J.1. The petitioners have filed the above writ petition for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in proceedings Na.Ka. No. 23307/RR2/2004-2, dated 21.10.2004 and the consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in MK. Na.Ka. No. 20636/B3/2002, dated 3.11.2004 and quash the same.2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.3. The petitioners were appointed as N.M.R between 1973 and 1977 in Animal Husbandry Department. Later under G.O. Ms. No. 116, dated 7.5.1997, the service of the petitioners and other casual labourers were regularised on temporary basis. Pursuant to the said Government Order, the petitioners were appointed as Animal Husbandary Assistants on temporary basis in and by the order dated 10-07-1977 passed by the third respondent. Thereafter, G.O.Ms. No. 17 dated 03-02-2004 was issued regularising the service of the petitioners from the date of appointment and the petitioners were ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of GE Power Controls Private Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Workmen of G ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR758]; (2005)IILLJ34Mad; (2005)1MLJ165
Markandey Katju, C.J. 1. This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge, dated April 26, 2004.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. We have perused the judgment of the learned single Judge and other papers, and are of the opinion that the said judgment cannot be sustained.4. The writ-petitioner had prayed for a writ of declaration to declare that portion of the notice of the respondents in the writ petition (the present appellants), by which the appellants required its workmen listed in the annexure to it to report at Limbasi, Gujarat to work under the third respondent in the writ petition, namely, G.E. Lighting India Private Ltd., to be illegal and unenforceable. The consequent individual order of transfers issued to the members of the writ-petitioner-union were also challenged.5. The writ-petitioner is a trade union and the first respondent is a company running a factory at No. 46, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Hosur, Tamil Nadu, wher...
Tag this Judgment!Muslim Middle School Rep., by Its Secretary Vs. Vedavalli Ammal Trust, ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC105; (2005)1MLJ577
ORDERN. Kannadasan, J.1. The above Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order passed by the lower Court in scrapping the report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner in I.A. No. 1620 of 1999 and appointing another Advocate Commissioner.2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even though certain defects are existing in the report submitted by the earlier Advocate Commissioner, Order 26 Rule 10(3) of Civil Procedure Code empowers the Court to direct a further enquiry by the very same Commissioner who shall file a supplementary report and in spite of the said direction, if any deficiency is noticed, it is only thereafter, the earlier report can be scrapped and another Advocate Commissioner can be appointed. In this connection, the learned counsel has relied on the decisions of this Court as well as the High Court of Kerala.3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the Court below has scrapped the report of the Advocate Commissioner by co...
Tag this Judgment!Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Paper Ltd. Rep. by Its M.D. Vs. Rama Damodara ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ1109Mad; (2005)1MLJ625
N.V. Balasubramanian, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Judge made in W.P. No. 13017 of 1994 dated April 29, 1998. According to the appellant, namely, Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Paper Limited, the first respondent was an Assistant Officer in charge of the Guest House of the appellant Company and certain charges were framed against him when he was working as a Supervisor of the Guest House belonging to the appellant. The Enquiry Officer, in the enquiry, has found that the charge Nos. 1 and 2 were not proved, but however, held that the charge Nos. 3 and 4 were proved. The disciplinary authority, after giving opportunity to the first respondent, accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer with reference to charge Nos. 3 and 4 and terminated the services of the first respondent, and the General Manager of the appellant company, on appeal, confirmed the same. The first respondent filed an application under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 again...
Tag this Judgment!K. Venkadasan, Secretary, Nlc I.T.i. Apprentice Welfare Assn. Vs. the ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)CTC441; [2005(106)FLR28]; (2005)IILLJ1132Mad
ORDERK. Raviraja Pandian, J.1. The petitioner Neyveli Lignite Corporation I.T.I. Apprentice Welfare Association, filed the writ petition seeking for the relief of issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records connected with the agreement dated 18.5.1995 entered between respondents 1 to 4 and respondents 5 to 19 before respondents 20 and 21 and to quash the same as null and void and direct the respondents 1 to 4 to reserve the 50% of semiskilled/unskilled and skilled jobs to the members of the petitioner's Association in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'N.L.C.').2. The case of the petitioner is that the members of the petitioner Association have completed I.T.I. Apprenticeship training under the N.L.C. on various trades. During the period of two and half years apprenticeship, the members were given stipend. According to the petitioner, the members of the petitioner Association were given specialised training in different trade only to ...
Tag this Judgment!The TuticorIn thermal Station Industrial Cooperative Society Limited V ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR1207]; (2005)IILLJ398Mad
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J.1. The Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus or direction forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from making a demand or collecting any amount as contribution under Section 45(B) of the Employees State Insurance Act from the Tuticorin Thermal Power Station Service Industrial Co-operative Society. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Managing Director of the Petitioner Society has submitted that the employees of the Power Station including permanent employees and employees engaged by private contractors are members of the petitioner society; that there are about 3500 manual workers employed in the power station; that the petitioner society has been established in the year 1987 for the uplift and welfare of the unskilled labourers in the locality, consisting of two staff members i.e., (i) Managing Director and (ii) Accounts Assistant; that the Managing Director is drawn from the Department of the Industries and Commerce an...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary, Saliar Mahajana Higher Secondary Schools Vs. G. Subbura ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTC8; (2005)1MLJ233
ORDERMarkandey Katju, C.J.1. This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned order of the learned single Judge dated 20.11.2003. By that order, the school management has been directed to pay salary of a regular teacher to the first respondent herein, for the period for which he worked i.e. from 11.8.1997.2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. The facts in detail have been set out in the judgment of the learned single Judge and hence we are not repeating the same.4. Admittedly, the first respondent had been appointed on 10.8.1997 as a Post Graduate Teacher in Commerce.Rule 15(4)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 states as follows:'Promotion shall be made on grounds of merit and ability, seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal.(4) Appointments to the various categories of teachers shall be made by the following methods :-i) Promotion from among the qualified teachers in that school.ii) If no quali...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »