Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC1879; [1990]67CompCas431(SC); JT1989(3)SC336; 1989(2)SCALE227; 1989Supp(2)SCC271
..... writ petitions was dismissed by this court by its order dated september 18, 1986 upholding the constitutional validity of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 and the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973 as amended by the coal mines nationalisation laws (amendment) act, 1978.5. it appears that after the disposal of the writ petition, this court passed ..... september 5, 1973 up to the date of payment to the commissioner of payment for coking coal mines. the said commissioner will make disbursement of the amount so received by him in accordance with the provisions of coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972.6. by the said order dated september 24, 1987, this court directed ..... 2. a writ petition being writ petition (civil) no. 404 of 1972 challenging the validity of the coking coal mines nationalisation act, 1972 etc. was filed in this court by the writ petitioners, raneegunj coal association and another. in that writ petition, on july 6,1973 the following order was passed by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1995)IIILLJ769Kant
..... -ii llj 17, held that during the pendency of an industrial dispute regarding the dismissal of workmen, the colliery having been nationalised and vested in the central government and thereafter in the 1st respondent-company, when section 17 of the coking coal mines nationalisation act provided for continuance of their service notwithstanding the transfer of private ownership to the central government or the government company ..... they were not in the service of the undertaking on the date of vesting. as explained earlier, in the light of the law laid by the supreme court in bharat coking coal limited, 1978-ii llj 17, it is clear that when there is a statutory transfer of employees pursuant to the undertaking being taken over to the board and when the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1990Cal409,94CWN1194
..... is a case of composite lease or a lease exclusively for winning fire clay, the bar of s. 3(3)(a) read with subsection (2) of s. 30 of the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973 prohibits the winning or mining of coal simpliciter even in case of a lease exclusively for winning fire clay if it becomes impossible to win fire clay without winning ..... of india reported in : [1980]3scr1042 . that is a land mark case deciding the rights of owners of mine in respect of both coking coal mines and coal mines proper as also composite mines in which there are alternate seams of coal and fire clay. common experience has it that coal and fire clay are frequently found together in the bowels of earth like twins in the womb of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(1)BomCR160; (1990)92BOMLR492; (1993)IIILLJ277Bom
..... act before us is very different from the scheme of the act before the supreme court. and observations of the supreme court regarding section 9 of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act cannot be blindly applied to section 3(7) of the present act. 12. now, is there anything in the scheme of the act before ..... company. 10. we do not see how this decision helps in the interpretation of section 3(7) of the present act. section 9(1) of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 provides generally for the enforcement of liabilities incurred prior to the appointed day against the owner and not against the central government or the government ..... have relied upon a decision of the supreme court in the case of the workmen v. the bharat coking coal ltd. reported in : (1978)iillj17sc . the case before the supreme court involved the interpretation of section 9 of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. under section 9 of that act it was provided as under: 9. central government not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1991(62)FLR601]; (1992)IILLJ111Bom
..... central government or the custodian in view of section 3(7) of the taking over act. it may be true that unlike section 9(2) of the coking coal mines nationalisation act (act no. 36 of 1972), section 3 (7) of the act does not specifically exclude liability in respect of gratuity or pension. however, that fact ..... the liability to make payment of gratuity, it is necessary to refer to the provision itself. the provision reads thus :'(f) 'employer' means, in relation to any establishment, factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port, railway company or shop - (i) ...... (ii) ..... (iii) in any other case, the person, who, or the authority which, has the ..... ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment, factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port, railway company or shop, and where the said affairs are entrusted to any other person, whether called a manager, on managing director or by any other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
..... has filed this second appeal. 6. there is no dispute that the right, title and interest of artc in the coal mine named'borgolai' situted at post office borgolai was acquired by the central government by the coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973. the name of this mine finds place in the schedule to the act at serial no. 4. 7. the only question that arises for ..... the same management; (x) all lands, buildings and equipments belonging to the owners of the mine, and in, adjacent to or situated on the surface of, the mine where the washing of coal obtained from the mine or manufacture, therefrom, of coke is carried on; (xi) all lands and buildings other than those referred to in sub-clause (x) wherever situated, if solely used for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1992)IILLJ330Ker
..... though some observations were made, which could only be treated as obiter, that judgment itself shows that what came up for consideration therein was only whether the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, enacted under article 39(b), was immune under article 31c from attack on ground of violation of articles 14 or 19,7. a division bench ..... and what came up for consideration in that case was only the correctness of a division bench decision in bharat coking coal ltd. v. p.k. agarwala 1979(3) scc 609 holding that term 'coking coal mine' does not include a coke oven plant and whether the act challenged therein was saved by article 39(b) or not. according to them, ..... 1983-sc-239 (supra). that was the view taken in the decision in bapuji educational association v. state (air) 1986 karnalaka 119 (supra) also. 8. sanjeev coke's case (supra) could not and did not overrule minerva mills case(supra). a constitution bench of five judges cannot overrule another decision of a constitution bench of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC938; JT1992(2)SC434; 1991(2)SCALE1309; 1992Supp(1)SCC692; [1991]Supp3SCR273; 1992(1)LC288(SC)
..... the common good of the people and would be clearly covered by clause (b) of article 39.34. in sanjeev coke manufacturing company (supra), the constitutional validity of coking coals mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 and the coal mines (taking over of management) act, 1973 was under challenge. the court said that when article 39(b) refers ..... capable of producing wealth for the community would be material resources. the conservation of the essential ingredients necessary for the crucial iron and steel industry by nationalisation is only in implementation of the policy declared in clause (b) of article 39.36. in the recent decision of this court in tinsukhia electric ..... interpreted in the earlier decisions of this court32. in state of karnataka v. ranganatha reddy (supra), the karnataka contract carriages acquisition act, 1976 for nationalisation of contract carriages in the state was challenged on the ground that there is no real and substantial nexus between the purpose of the acquisition and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1992)2CALLT357(HC),97CWN122
..... the coking coal mines (emergency provisions) ordinance, later replaced by the coking coal mines (emergency provisions) ordinance, later replaced by the coking coal mines (emergency provision) act, 1971, the central government took over the management of all coking coal mines/coke oven plants. the appellant herein, which was constituted on 1st january, 1972, was appointed by the central government, as custodian of coking coal mines/coke oven plants. subsequently, by virtue of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972, all coking coal mines/coke oven .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 47(1992)DLT1; 1992(22)DRJ476
..... , 1990 passed by the 7th additional district judge, dhanbad in miscellaneous case no.54 etc. of 1985 where by the right of the petitioners to claim management compensation under the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') was rejected on the ground that on-the date of vesting, the petitioners were neither the owners nor occupiers rather they were ..... for compensation as owner of the ganhcodih colliery in accordance with law. (4) the coal mines were nationalised by the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972. under this act, the mines vested in the government with effect from 1st may, 1972. the act contains a schedule showing the various mines which come under the nationalisation scheme. the mines involved in this petition is shown as seriall no. 156, namely, ganhcodih, in .....
Tag this Judgment!