Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(3)ARBLR192(Bom); 2004(5)BomCR311; [2004(101)FLR926]; 2004(3)MhLj199
..... 'at the same time, it was clearly ruled that:--'if any provision is inconsistent with the scheme of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, then the provision of the arbitration act to that extent would not be applicable. ..... undisputedly the powers of the labour court in that regard were amended by the maharashtra act 47 of 1977 whereby a proviso was added to sub-section (3) of section 79 empowering the labour court to admit such applications even after the expiry of the period for sufficient reasons. ..... it is also to be noted that section 17(1) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 merely provided that the award shall be published in such a manner as the appropriate government thinks fit within a period of 30 days from the date of its receipt by the appropriate government. ..... apart from the said decision of the apex court regarding the directory character of the provision contained in section 17 in relation to publication of the award, section 17a clearly empowers the government even to postpone the enforceability of the award. ..... otherwise, in terms of sub-section (2) of section 17 r/w section 17a(1) the award would become enforceable on expiry of the period of 30 days from the date of publication. ..... workers union (supra), while interpreting the provision of section 17(1) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 in relation to the requirement of publication of the award, has held that the same is merely directory and not mandatory. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1994)ILLJ395Bom; 1994(1)MhLj776
..... expression to be interpreted therein is 'agreement' because it is nobody's case that there is any fault on the part of the respondents to implement any award or settlement which expressions are defined under the industrial disputes act, 1947 as well as the bombay industrial relations act, 1946. 19. ..... for instance, in the bombay industrial employment (standing orders) rules, 1959, framed under the industrial employment (standing orders) act, 1946 as applicable to the state of maharashtra, the model standing orders were framed for all categories of workmen as given in schedule f to ..... really speaking, as is clear from para 23 of the judgment itself, the liability to pay wages because of illegal closure arose in the said case under the statutory provisions of sub-section 6 of section 25-o of the industrial disputes act, 1947 in which it is provided that if no application for permission under section 25(o)(1) is made for closure within the specified time, or if the permission for closure is refused, the closure of the under-taking is deemed to be illegal from the date of the closing ..... (complaint cases) under section 28 of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 (for short 'the act') before the learned industrial court, amraoti, they challenged their orders of termination on the ground that in terminating their services, the respondents have committed an unfair labour practice covered by items 5 and 9 of schedule iv of the act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2001(3)ALLMR666; [2001(91)FLR127]; (2002)IVLLJ975Bom
..... the respondent-bank had, therefore, raised a preliminary issue contending that the petitioner was not an employee as per the definition of sub-section 13 of section 3 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 and on that count the labour court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the application.2. ..... the cross examination of the petitioner clearly indicates the nature of his duties and responsibilities and that supports the contention of the bank that he was not an employee as defined under sub-section (13) of section 3 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946.9. ..... the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the question as to whether the present case is governed by the provisions of sub-section (13) of section 3 of the bombay industrial relations act or not is to be considered not from the designation of the post which he is holding but from the nature of the work he is discharging from that post ..... according to the petitioner, the respondent-bank is governed by the provisions of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946. ..... short question that arises in this petition is as to whether the petitioner was an employee as defined in sub-section (13) of section 3 of the bombay industrial relations act at the time of his dismissal from the service. ..... the cross examination further indicates that he had to entertain correspondence with co-operative department of the state of maharashtra, agricultural department of the state of maharashtra, reserve bank of india and apex bank. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC285; [1995(71)FLR1040]; JT1995(6)SC625; 1995LabIC2714; (1996)ILLJ899SC; 1995(5)SCALE400; (1995)6SCC326; [1995]Supp3SCR702
..... act was the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 ..... the pipeline or are being attempted to be passed and proceedings are initiated for passing such ultimate orders which are alleged to be contrary to item 1 of schedule iv of the maharashtra act.sub-section (2) of section 30 of the maharashtra act lays down:in any proceeding before it under this act, the court, may pass such interim order (including any temporary relief or restraining order) as it deems just and proper (including directions to the person to withdraw temporarily the ..... appeal centers round the jurisdiction of the labour court functioning under the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' for short) regarding entertaining of complaints filed under section 28(1) of the maharashtra act in connection with contemplated discharge or dismissal of the employees alleged to be resorted to by the employer by way of unfair labour practice, as mentioned in item 1 of schedule iv of the maharashtra act. ..... keep in view the fact that as per section 7 of the maharashtra act, all the complaints pertaining to item 1 of schedule iv can be filed only before the labour court and no other compliant regarding unfair labour practice can be filed before the labour court, and once the labour court is given the powers in appropriate course of passing interim relief of restraining orders as per section 30(2) it would clearly indicate the legislative intention .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(1)BomCR656; JT2009(15)SC269; (2010)ILLJ561SC; 2009(14)SCALE623; (2010)2SCC273; 2009(10)LC5041(SC)
..... the argument that giving the plain meaning would deprive the workers of the protection under bombay industrial relations act, 1946 of raising industrial disputes before the labour court and the industrial court, was also termed as incorrect argument, as firstly, there was no vested right for selecting the forum and secondly, the legislature had the competence to enact special laws for a class or section of workmen for improving their conditions of service and such special law would always ..... section 17g provides that the provisions of bombay industrial relations act, 1946 would be applicable in case of trial of offences under this act. ..... singh, learned senior counsel for the appellants that as per sections 3(13) and 3(14) of the bombay industrial relations act, all the employees are covered and any reduction from those employees has to be only after the notice of change is given. ..... xcix of 1968 for regulating the employment of unprotected manual workers employed in certain employments in the state of maharashtra to make provision for their adequate supply and proper and full utilization in such employments and for matters connected therewith. ..... in short, it was contended that under section 21, the workmen could retain the privileges and benefits under any act, award or contract, if such privileges were better than the ones offered by the act and in that sense, even if the manual worker was protected under the various labour laws, he could still be governed by the mathadi act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(3)ALLMR1; 2008(2)BomCR497; (2008)110BOMLR805; 2008(4)MhLj125; 1996(72)FLR166
..... section 35 of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946, which provides for standing orders, which governing relationship between the employees and employer, reads as under:settlement of standing orders by commissioner of labour (1) within six weeks from the date of the application of this act to an industry, every employer therein shall submit for approval to the commissioner of labour in the prescribed manner draft standing orders regulating the relations between him and his employees with regard to the industrial ..... maintained the date of regularization awarded by the learned member, industrial court to be the date ..... not necessary to reproduce similar observations in maharashtra state board of secondary and higher secondary ..... failure to comply with the model standing orders amounts to failure to implement award, settlement or agreement, as contemplated in item 9 of schedule-iv, as held by a division bench of this court in para ..... while a union alone could be entitled to raise a general grievance about employing casuals or temporaries covered under item 6 of schedule-iv, individual employees undoubtedly have a right to complain about failure to implement award, settlement or agreement, which include a model standing order. ..... a general nature where the practice of employing employees as badlis or casuals or temporaries and continuing them as such for years has been categorized as unfair labour practice, whereas item 9 would cover specific infringement of award, settlement or agreement. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC413; 1999(1)ALLMR(SC)645; [1999(81)FLR932]; JT1998(8)SC552; (1999)ILLJ416SC; 1998(6)SCALE519; (1999)2SCC143; [1998]Supp3SCR488
..... . in this connection, it is profitable to note that the phrase 'covered by the settlement' as found in the said clause of section 24 is not defined by the act nor it is defined by the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 or by the central act, namely, the industrial disputes act, 1947 ..... 19to,(here mention name of the employer and full address of the undertaking)dear sir(s)/madam,in accordance with the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of section 24 of the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices act, 1971, i/we (here insert name of the person(s)) hereby give you notice that i/we propose to call a strike of the workmen employed in your undertaking propose to go on strike along with the other workmen employed in your undertaking from ..... it was also submitted that the very fact that failure to implement the award was made by the legislature a subject matter of the complaint, showed that such implementation would not be covered by the settlement. ..... item 9 thereof deals with failure to implement award, settlement or agreement on the part of the employer which would be treated as general unfair labour practice on the part of the employers. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC1867; 2008(3)ALLMR(SC)861; 2008(3)BomCR25; [2008(117)FLR891]; JT2008(4)SC211; (2008)IILLJ697SC; 2008(4)SCALE704; AIRSCW2618; 2008(2)Supreme760; (2008)13SCC441
..... section 59 makes it clear that if any proceeding is initiated under the the mrtu and pulp act, 1971, no proceeding shall be entertained by any authority in respect of those matters under the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 (bombay act) and industrial disputes act, 1947 (in short 'the i.d ..... learned counsel pointed out that in the event we were to hold that it is only in clear cases or undisputed cases the labour court or the industrial tribunal under the act can examine the complaints made thereunder, the whole provision would be rendered otiose and in each of those cases provisions of the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 or the industrial disputes act will have to be invoked. ..... exercise, we are afraid, can also be done by the industrial tribunal under the bombay industrial relations act, 1946 or under the industrial disputes act. ..... 'a' to the petition are working in the canteen of the management in its factory at nagothane, district raigad in the state of maharashtra, and the management was treating them as persons employed on contract basis through a contractor named m/s rashmi caterers, who was impleaded in the writ petition as respondent ..... : (1963)iillj89sc to contend that even in cases arising under section 33c(2) of the industrial disputes act the scope, though very limited, certain incidental questions can be gone into like a claim for special allowance for operating adding machine which may not be based on the sastry award made under the provisions of chapter v-a. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2006(2)MhLj115
..... act' or the bombay industrial relations act (for short 'the bir act') as the case ..... the high court the supreme court held that when the question as to whether the workmen concerned were the employees of the company was disputed and was not undisputable, a labour court or industrial court hearing the complaint under the ulp cannot decide the question whether the workmen were the employees of the company. ..... would have to be decided in a reference under section 10 of the industrial disputes act or in a proceeding under the bir act as the case may be.6. ..... 1 afresh and held that as the industrial court exercising the powers under section 30 of the ulp act had no jurisdiction to entertain and try ..... dated 3rd september 2002 passed by consent of the parties, this court set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the industrial court for consideration afresh in accordance with law laid down by the supreme court in the case of cipla limited v. ..... case where the relationship was called in question, the industrial court would be required to consider the aspect whether the employer-employee relationship existed which could not be done under the ulp act and the jurisdiction vested only under section 10 of the industrial disputes act or the bir act as the case may be.8. ..... 1991 filed under the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and unfair labour practices act (for short 'the ulp act') for want of jurisdiction ..... maharashtra general kamgar ..... maharashtra general kamgar ..... maharashtra general kamgar .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1489; 2006(3)BomCR260; (2006)4CompLJ4(SC); JT2006(3)SC235; 2006(3)SCALE1; (2006)3SCC434; [2006]67SCL107(SC)
..... according to them, rmms is the only representative and approved trade union under the bombay industrial relations act for greater bombay. ..... 536 of 1992 clearly shows that after hearing the concerned parties it has been noticed that the government of maharashtra although had not given clearance to sell the surplus lands of all the 13 mills in mumbai and 5 mills outside mumbai, as has been done in other states, agreed that with a view to compensate therefore mcgm would ..... the order of this court dated 11th may, 2005 reads as under:so far as transactions relating to seven mills belonging to the national textile corporation are concerned, including sale of jupiter mills, it is not in dispute that transactions have reached a final ..... 58(1) applies also to closed mills but sub-regulation (6) of dcr 58 does not apply to sick industries which have not been referred to bifr. ..... it further appears that the government of maharashtra had not been asked to make assessment regarding sacrifice, if any, made by them in this behalf or any benefit which would accrue to them with the sale so that the board could consider such a sacrifice/benefit ..... reference to bifr in terms of section 16 of the act evidently was made for the aforementioned purpose ..... iii) the clarification made by the state is neither ultra vires section 37 of the mrtp act nor is violative of the constitutional provisions. ..... the writ petitioners filed a writ petition before the bombay high court questioning the validity of dcr 58 which was .....
Tag this Judgment!