Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: bombay industrial relations act 1946 maharashtra section 42 notice of change Page 1 of about 954 results (0.053 seconds)

Hindustan Hosiery Industries Vs. F.H. Lala and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1974SC526; [1974(28)FLR213]; (1974)ILLJ340SC; (1974)4SCC316; [1974]3SCR302; 1974(1)SLJ258(SC)

..... sabha, bombay (briefly the sabha) under section 73a of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, in pursuance of a notice of change dated ..... , for example, the contribution of the worker to the job, the nature of the work, the part placed by the machine, the incentive to work and above all protection against any creation of industrial unrest because of the existence side by side of two categories of workers, particularly if there is no possibility of transfer of labour from one type of work to the other from time to time, ..... described as a bare minimum wage in order to distinguish it from the wage structure which is 'subsistence plus' or fair wage, but too much emphasis on the adjective 'bare' in relation to the minimum wage is apt to lead to the erroneous assumption that the maintenance wage is a wage which enables the worker to cover his bare physical needs and keep himself just above starvation ..... discretionary jurisdiction only in cases where awards are made in violation of the principles of natural justice, causing substantial and grave injustice to parties or raises an important principle of industrial law requiring elucidation and final decision by this court or disclosures such other exceptional or special circumstances which merit the consideration of this court' per subba rao, j. ..... maharashtra state directorate of industries as a small scale industry ..... is directed against an award of the industrial court, maharashtra (hereinafter referred to for brevity as ..... the maharashtra gazette .....

indorama Synthetics India Limited Vs. Vijay and Others

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

..... the respondents thereafter approached the learned industrial court with a grievance that by transferring the employees from the quality control department, the appellant has committed an illegal change, as notice of change under section 42(1) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (for short, the bir act ) was not given. ..... the learned counsel further submits that if the employer wanted to effect a change, the same cannot be done without notice of change as contemplated under section 42 of the bir act. ..... in any case, as has been held by the apex court that since the issue of assignment of work and transfer of workers within the establishment, is covered by item no.2 of schedule iii, notice of change as required under section 42 would not be required. 13. ..... the apex court considering the items in the schedule to the said act, considered that change of weekly rest day from sunday to wednesday in the case of one colliery and to thursday in the other collieries without notice under section 9a of the said act was not admissible. ..... it is further contended that this act of the appellant amounts to unfair labour practice under item no.9 of schedule iv of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971. ..... the establishment of the appellant is situated at midc (maharashtra industrial development corporation) area, buritibori, nagpur. .....

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

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(4)BomCR811

..... 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. ..... it was simple for the petitioner bank to have given a notice of change under section 42(1) as soon as it had received the directions from the authority under the maharashtra co-operative societies act and should have entered in to an agreement with the representative union i.e. ..... schedule iii enlists 7 industrial matters and if any employee or representative union desires a change in respect of such matters a notice of change under section 42(4) is mandatory. ..... schedule ii enumerates 11 classes of industrial matters and for any change to be effected by the employer in such matters, a notice of change under section 42(1) is mandatory. ..... her argument in nutshell was that for any change of whatsoever nature, adverse or beneficial to the employees, a notice of change must be given to them under section 42 of the act by any party intending to effect any change in respect of an industrial matter and the procedure prescribed under chapter viii must be followed.7. .....

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

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1990(1)BomCR467

..... these workshops are, therefore, governed by the bombay industrial relations act and it is, therefore, obligatory on the part of the respondent to give notice under section 42 of the bombay industrial relations act before bringing a change as laid down in the impugned circular.the corporation has principally engaged to render public passenger transport service ..... is held that the provisions of bombay industrial relations act have no application to the corporation. ..... the proviso of the bombay industrial relations act have therefore, no application to the workshops of the corporation.5. ..... made a submission that the government by notification dated 2-5-1967 has exempted an industry engaged in conduct and maintenance of public passenger transport services by omnibus form the provisions of the bombay industrial relations act according to mr. ..... corporation in view of the notifications has been exempted from the provisions laid down under section 9-a of the industrial disputes act for giving notice of change.15. ..... 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. ..... consequently, the act of 1946 has no application to the workers engaged in the industrial establishment of the respondent ..... , 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. .....

P.A. Ambure and Others Vs. Vyapari Sahakari Bank Maryadit and Others

Court : Mumbai

..... it will be necessary to make a reference to sub-section (3) of section 2 of mrtu and pulp act which reads thus:- 2(3) except as otherwise hereinafter provided, this act shall apply to the industries to which the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, bom. ..... the first respondent made an application under sections 78, 79, 80a and 97 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (for short bir act ) before the labour court at solapur praying for a declaration that the strike commenced by the appellants with effect from 21st april, 1989 be declared as illegal. ..... what is required under sub-section (2) of section 42 is a notice of change in industrial matters. ..... i of 1904, shall apply to such cessor, as if this act has been repealed in relation to such industry by a maharashtra act . 16. ..... state of maharashtra and others (lpa no.25 of 1987 decided on 13th march, 1987 by the nagpur bench)and submitted that approach notice was not necessary as the appellants had complied with the requirements of section 24 of the mrtu and pulp act by issuing a notice. 12. ..... the appellants issued notice of strike in accordance with sub-section (1) of section 24 of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 (for short the mrtu and pulp act ). ..... the first respondent is a co-operative bank duly registered under the maharashtra cooperative societies act, 1960. .....

M/S. Neco Schubert and Salzer Ltd. Vs. Krushna Nagorao Lute and Others

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

..... it has also been held that the employment of the new recruits on temporary basis for getting the extra work done, amounts to change in the service conditions and hence, the notice of change under section 42 of the bombay industrial relations act was required to be given to the employees and failure to give such notice, vitiates the change. ..... it has to be held that the employer has right to withdraw the overtime work even unilaterally and such action on the part of the employer does not amount to change, requiring a notice under section 42 of the bombay industrial relations act. ..... if, for example in the present case, such regular hours of work were sought to be increased, it would have required a notice of change under section 9a. ..... the complaint was filed by the elected representatives of the employees under the bombay industrial relations act, 1946. ..... it was a complaint invoking item 9 of schedule iv of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 on the ground that the petitioner-employer was engaged in unfair labour practice by recruiting new employees and taking overtime work from the permanent employees. ..... 21.8.1984), the maharashtra act no.1 of 1972 has been impliedly repealed and no complaint is maintainable under the said act. d. .....

V.R. Pastekar and Others Vs. the Managing Director, Marathwada Develop ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(3)ALLMR141; 2000(4)BomCR458

..... development that took place which gave rise to this petition is that on 14th june 1987 a notice of change as per the provisions of section 42(1) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 was given by the respondent no. ..... shri powar has made a statement that thereafter there was a settlement between the recognised union and texcom with respect to the notice of change and as per that settlement, some of the employees have soughtvoluntary retirement. ..... it is the contention of the petitioners that instead of following provisions regarding retrenchment under section 25-f of the industrial disputes act, a trick was played to remove these persons from service by creating an impression that they were being given alternative ..... 4 and 7 on the basis of that notice of change with respect to all 186 workers named in that notice of change it has come to an end. ..... which was recorded by this court on 12-1-2000, we do find that now the petition has become infructuous with respect to the notice of change dated 14-6-1987 and the proposed retrenchment. ..... no effective steps with respect to the notice of change of retrenchment in consequence can now be ..... has, therefore, made a statement that now as there is a settlement with respect to the notice of change that notice is not going to be implemented. ..... texcom had proposed a change as per notice of change dated 14-6-1987. ..... was a proposal of transferring the shares of texcom to maharashtra state textile corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the m.s.t.c. .....

The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation thru' the General Manager, BEST ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(4)BomCR692; [2006(108)FLR665]

..... section 3(13) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 defines the expression 'employee' as follows : '3(13) 'employee' means any person employed to do any skilled or unskilled work for hire or reward in any industry, and includes (a) a person employed by a contractor to do any work for him in the execution of a contract with an employer within the meaning of sub clause (e) of clause (14); (b) a person who has been [dismissed, discharged or retrenched or whose services have been terminated] from employment on account of any dispute relating to change in respect of which notice is given or an application made ..... the first submission is that the respondent was not an employee within the meaning of section 3(13) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 and that therefore, the industrial court had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971. ..... on this material, the industrial court could not have possibly come to the conclusion that the respondent was an employee within the meaning of section 3(13) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 and an employee within the meaning of section 3(5) of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of trade unions act, 1971. .....

Kolhapur Sugar Mills, Ltd. Vs. Syed Taki Bilgrami and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1968)ILLJ800Bom

..... section 42(2) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, provides that an employee desiring a change in respect of an industrial matter must give a notice in the prescribed form to the employer who is to forward a copy of the same to the conciliator for the industry concerned ..... 2 union to the present petition, and they were : (1) that the present petition was not maintainable by reason of non-joinder of the maharashtra state farming corporation; (2) that the question of master and servant was a question of fact which could not be gone into on a writ petition; (3) that the award of the industrial court being based in this case on certain admissions made by the petitioner-company on affidavit before the ..... which make it clear that, at any rate, ever since the surplus lands of the petitioner-company were taken away under the maharashtra agricultural lands (ceiling on holdings) act, 1961, the petitioner-company had to procure its requirements of sugarcane, for keeping its mills going from private cultivators. ..... originally owned an agricultural estate of 1,135 acres of land on which sugarcane was cultivated by it, but after the maharashtra agricultural lands (ceiling on holdings) act, 1951, was passed, under the provisions of that act, a major part of the estate owned by the petitioner-company was taken over by the government and handed over to the maharashtra state farming corporation, leaving only 79 acres of agricultural land for the petitioner-company itself, as from 1 august .....

Keshariprasad S/O Sadhuram Tiwari Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1987(3)BomCR74

..... this petition is directed against the order of the first labour court holding that a complaint by an employee under section 28 (1) of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the unfair labour practices act'), is not maintainable, without his complying with the provisions of section 42(4) of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'the bombay act').2. ..... in clause (s) of section 2 of the central act.under sub-section (13) of section 3 of the bombay act, 'employee' means any person employed to do any skilled or unskilled work for hire or reward in any industry, and includes :-(a) a person employed by a contractor to do any work for him in the execution of a contract with an employer within the meaning of sub-clause (o) of clause (14);(b) a person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched or whose services have been terminated from employment on account of any dispute relating to change in respect of which a notice is given or an application .....