Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: bombay industrial relations act 1946 maharashtra section 39 alteration in standing orders Page 1 of about 611 results (0.023 seconds)

Municipal Corporation of Gr. Bombay Vs. General Secretary, BEST Worker ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(6)BomCR479

..... act the existing settled standing order should be altered after the applicant union and the management undertaking finalise the draft for inclusion at the appropriate place in the existing settled standing orders and submit the same for settlement under section 39(1) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946.11. ..... or dismissal, the employee shall have a right of second appeal to the general manager or any other officer duly authorised by him and notified, provided that such appeal is lodged within 14 days of the receipt in writing of the order in the first appeal as aforesaid.at the hearing of any appeal provided for under this standing order, the employee concerned may be represented by his representative under section 30 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, or any person of his choice. ..... punishment of stoppage or postponement of an annual increment at the end of two years and every two years thereafter, if necessary, in the light of the record during the respective two years, if the employee or his representative under section 30 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 makes a request to that effect, on the expiry of a period of not less than two years from the date the punishment was given effect to, such a review will be made within a period of two months from the ..... 96 of 2003 before the industrial court, maharashtra state. ..... state of maharashtra) reported in : air1999sc3734 . .....

Anjani Kumar Co. Ltd. Etc. Etc. Vs. (Smt.) Manubai Kashinath Etc. Etc.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1989(59)FLR172]; (1990)ILLJ316Bom

..... and notified in the official gazette by the state government from time to time, in respect of any additional matters included in the schedule i, or any alteration made in that schedule, on or after the date of commencement of the bombay industrial relations (amendment) act, 1977, shall unless such model standing orders are held by the commissioner of labour to be less advantageous to the employees than the corresponding standings orders applicable to them, also apply in relation to such employees in the undertakings in respect of which standing orders have already been settled under section 35.'7. ..... gir-1477/2397 (iii) lab 9, l dated october 16, 1981, the labour department of the government of maharashtra amended and notified model standing orders under sub-section (5) of section 35 of the act introducing therein clause 24, sub-clause 5a, whereby provision was made for paying subsistence allowance to a suspended workman pending enquiry. ..... as the question of law as to the interpretation of section 40a of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') is involved in these writ petitions, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. .....

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Bank Karmachari Sangh ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(4)BomCR811

..... the crucial and interesting issue to be decided by me is whether by framing separate and independent service rules de hors the certified standing orders or in addition to the certified standing orders without following the mandatory provisions under section 42(1) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 amounts to unfair labour practice as contemplated under item 9 of the act.2. ..... a detailed procedure which is mandatory for framing of the standing orders is given in the chapter vii of the act and section 40 finally lays down that the standing orders framed under this chapter under section 35 in respect of the employees shall be determinative of the relations between the employer and the employees in regard to all the industrial matters specified in schedule i. ..... it is needless to mention that the petitioner bank is governed by the provisions of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 and is also governed by the provisions of the maharashtra co-operative societies act, 1960.1 need not dwell on the point that both the statutes operate in separate fields and both have different object to be achieved. ..... the petitioner bank could not have altered or modified or effected any change even beneficial to the employees without giving a notice of change under section 42(1) of the act. .....

Rajya Pariwahan Yantrik Kamgar Sanghatana Vs. Regional Manager, Mahara ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1990(1)BomCR467

..... besides this, there is no recognised union either under bombay industrial relations act or under the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act. ..... moreover, the government by notification dated 8-5-1957 by exercising power under section 13-b of the industrial employment (standing orders) act 1946, notified the regulations in that behalf. ..... this court has held that notice in compliance of section 9-a of the industrial disputes act is necessary for change in timing of hours of work and rest-interval must be regarded as a condition of service.the government by notification dated 12-3-1951 in exercise of the power under clause (b) of the proviso to section 9-a of the industrial dispute act, has notified the regulations admittedly, alteration in working hours are brought in pursuance of powers conferred on this respondent under clause 54 of the regulations ..... clause 54 of the regulations as discussed empowers the management to fix or alter working hours in a manner deemed necessary is the public interest. ..... section 56 provides that the period of working including rest interval shall not be more than 10 hours on any day.clause 54 of the regulations reads as thus:---'the working hours of employees shall be fixed or altered in such manner as the competent authority may deem necessary in the public interest ..... 'regulations thus authorise the competent authority to fix or alter the working hours, and in such manner which suits the interest of administration .....

Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. Bhojane Gopinath D. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT2003(10)SC440; (2004)ILLJ821SC; 2003(10)SCALE77; (2004)9SCC488; 2004(2)SLJ238(SC); 2004(1)LC707(SC)

..... rules and model standing orders prescribed thereunder, which run thus:- provisions of industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946, central rules and model standing orders prescribed thereunder provisions of the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946 applicable in the state of maharashtra after incorporating state amendments together with state rules and model standing orders prescribed thereunder title of the act an act to require employers in industrial establishments formally to define conditions of employment under them title of the act an act to provide for rules defining with sufficient precision certain conditions of employment in industrial establishments in the state of bombay. ..... section 2(1-a): not incorporated section 2(1-a): "amendments" means in relation to the model standing orders, any amendments proposed to such orders under section 3 and includes any alterations, variations or additions proposed thereto. ..... by section 2(1-a) the expression `amendments' has been defined in relation to model standing orders to mean any amendments proposed to such orders under section 3 and includes any alterations, variations or additions proposed thereto. .....

Mahindra and Mahindra Limited Vs. Sharad Laxman Dalvi and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(2)BomCR302

..... 1 has submitted that considering the provision of section 2-a of the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946, as applicable to the state of maharashtra and the decision of the apex court in bajaj auto ltd. v. ..... this shows that model standing orders, prescribed by bombay industrial employment (standing orders) rules, 1959, framed under section 15 by the government of maharashtra, ipso facto would be applicable with effect from 15-1-1959.18. ..... by section 2(1-a) the expression amendments has been defined in relation to model standing orders to mean any amendments proposed to such orders under section 3 and includes any alterations, variations or additions proposed thereto. ..... set out in the schedule applicable to such establishment shall apply to such establishment from such date as the state government may by notification in the official gazette appoint in this behalf;provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect any standing orders which are finally certified under this act and have come into operation under this act in respect of any industrial establishment before the date of the coming into force of the industrial employment (standing orders) (bombay amendment) act, 1957.2. .....

Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel and Co. Vs. Industrial Court, Nagpur and or ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1969Bom56; (1968)70BOMLR298; ILR1969Bom455; (1968)IILLJ757Bom; 1968MhLJ377

..... the preamble to act 22 of 1965 shows that the act made various amendments or additions and alterations to the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, because it was considered expedient to extend the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, as amended, throughout the state of maharashtra, such as vidarbha. ..... other changes recommended in section 78(i)of the act the statement of objects and reasons indicated that the new clause d was added to section 78(1) of the bombay industrial relations act, in order to enlarge the powers of the labour court, to require an employer to reinstate an employee with full back wages payable to him and compensation not exceeding rs.1500 and possibility of getting suitable employment more than six months prior to the action if such action is out of non-compliance with any standing order applicable to the employee ..... we rely on it only for the purpose of showing that the labour court under section 78(1)a(a)(i) of the bombay industrial relations act could take cognizance of the order of dismissal of an employee under standing orders, and that before approaching the labour court the employee had to make an application to his employer as per proviso to section 42(4) of the bombay industrial relations act .10. .....

Chhotabhai Jethabhai Patel Vs. Industrial Court, Nagpur

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1967MhLJ40

..... the preamble to act 22 of 1965 shows that the act made various amendments or additions and alterations to the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, because it was considered expedient to extend the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, as amended, throughout the state of maharashtra and to repeal the corresponding laws in force in other parts of the state of maharashtra, such as vidarbha. ..... in other words, if the order was not made under standing orders but was otherwise illegal or improper or against the provision of any law, or for default or misconduct more than six months prior to the date of such order, it does not appear that the labour court had any power to give relief to such an employee under the bombay industrial relations act as it existed prior to its amendment by maharashtra act. ..... 78(1)a(a)(i) of the bombay industrial relations act could take cognizance of the order of dismissal of an employee under the standing orders, and that before approaching the labour court the employee had to make an application to his employer as per proviso to s. ..... section 42(4), so far as orders passed by the employer under a standing order and challenge to the order of dismissal or discharge, etc. ..... d by the labour court, the occasion for demanding such a relief is order of dismissal under a standing order, the provisions of sub-section (4) of s. ..... , passed under the standing order is concerned, they are also excluded from the operation of sub-section (4) of s. 42. .....

Gangaram Atmaram Vishwasrao Vs. the National Textile Corporation (Sn) ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1996(1)BomCR465; (1996)ILLJ1029Bom

..... in anjani kumar's case (supra), this court held that, because of the provision of section 40-a of the bir act, model standing orders made and notified by the state government in respect of any additional matter included in chapter i of the bir act or any alteration made in schedule i on and after the date of commencement of bombay industrial relations (amendment) act, 1977, shall, unless the said model standing orders are held by the commissioner of labour to be less advantageous to the employees than the corresponding certified standing orders applicable to them, also apply ..... model standing order 4-c added in schedule i to the bombay industrial employment (standing orders) rules, 1959, framed under the provision of the industrial employment (standing order) act, 1946, reads as under :- '4-c. ..... 60 of 1986 before the industrial court, maharashtra, bombay, under section 84 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the bir act'). ..... , the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946, and a similar model standing order was also framed thereunder, a conspectus whereof makes the intention very clear. ..... schedule i was amended by addition of item 14 by the amending act maharashtra 47 of 1977 adding the words 'employment or re-employment of probationers or bad lies or temporary or casual workmen, and their conditions of service' in the item. .....

M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, ...

Court : Allahabad

..... date of the coming into force of the industrial employment (standing orders) (bombay amendment) act, 1957; (2) notwithstanding anything contained in the proviso to sub-section (1) model standing orders made in respect of additional matters included in the schedule after the coming into force of the act referred to in that proviso (being additional matters relating to probationers or badlis or temporary or casual workmen) shall unless such model standing orders are in the opinion of certifying officer less advantageous to them than to corresponding standing orders applicable to them under the said proviso ..... in bharat petroleum corporation limited vs maharashtra general kamgar union11, a bench of two learned judges of the supreme court observed that prior to 1956, the jurisdiction of the certifying officer and the appellate authority was limited and their only function was to inquire whether the standing orders made by the establishment were in conformity with the model standing orders. ..... the model standing orders would not ipso facto apply to the industrial establishment nor would an amendment to them have the effect of adding to, supplanting or altering the certified standing orders. ..... whether amendments made in model standing orders become automatically applicable to certified standing orders without any amendment to the standing orders of the establishment finally certified under section 10 of the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946. 2. .....