Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1993(1)BomCR723; (1993)IILLJ365Bom
1. All these 28 Writ Petitions are directed against (1) Government of Maharashtra Order, Industries Energy and Labour Department, No. ADV 5781/1652/LAB-2 dated August 12, 1981 referring for adjudication of certain disputes under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra, and (2) the Award dated November 12, 1986 passed by the Industrial Tribunal (S. A. Patil) Maharashtra, Bombay in Reference (I.T.) No. 225 of 1981. 2. We are concerned with the road transport industry i.e. business of transport of goods by trucks or lorries. The Government of Maharashtra had already fixed minimum rates of wages for workers engaged in the transport industry (See para 8 of the impugned award). Respondent No. 3 (All India Transport Employees' Association) is a Trade Union, registered under the Trade Unions Act, whose members are some of the workers of some of the units of the road transport industry covered by this writ petition. The third respondent, on behalf of the worker...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1967)69BOMLR296; (1967)IILLJ388Bom; 1967MhLJ145
Patel, J.1. These four special civil applications arise out of the orders made by the authority under the Minimum Wages Act in respect of claims made by members of different departments of the opponent 'city of Nagpur Corporation.' The petitioners are in the employment of the Nagpur Corporation and item 6 in the schedule governs the petitioners; employment. The petitioners' working day is eight hours a day. They alleged that they were required to work on Sundays, a day of holiday fixed under the Minimum Wages Act by rules under S. 13 made by the Government, and since they were made to work on Sundays, they must be paid remuneration for the extra work, or in any event compensation for the work done on Sundays. 2. On behalf of the Corporation, two defences were set up, one that at least in respect of some work the notification of the State Government under S. 5 applied only to unskilled workers and, therefore, the skilled workers were out of the benefit of the notification and could not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1991(61)FLR382]; (1992)ILLJ242Bom
1. The petitioner-Union represents the workmen employed at the canteen of respondent No. 4, Suvidha Catering Service, in the establishment of respondent No. 3, the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. The said canteen is maintained under the provisions of Section 46 of the Factories Act. The petitioner-Union raised a dispute on behalf of the workmen working in the fourth respondent canteen with the third respondent-Corporation as under :'The Union hereby demands that the workmen working in the canteen of your industrial establishment of Refinery at Mahul, Bombay, be extended basic salary, dearness allowance, other allowance and all other service conditions applicable to them under the long term settlement dated April 12, 1983 currently in force on and from the dates on which the said workmen were employed.'Their demand having not been conceded to the petitioner-Union approached the office of the second respondents, the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)-I of the Regional Labour Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2000)IIILLJ629Bom
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Mumbai on June 30, 1997 adjudicating two references namely Reference No. CGIT-2/47 of 1993 and Reference No. CGIT-2/26 of 1995 is under challenge in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the petitioner ANZ Grindlays Bank Ltd. 2. ANZ Grindlays Bank Ltd. (for short 'the Bank') is a Banking Company having its head office in London and various Branches in India including a dozen of them in the City of Bombay. The respondent No. 1 Grindlays Bank Employees Union (for short 'the Union') is a recognised union representing the workmen employed in the Bank in India. The dispute relates to reinstatement and regularisation of various employees in the sub staff cadre of the Bank. According to the Union, the Bank in violation of the various awards governing the recruitment and employment of employees in the Bank resorted to engage various persons in its branches...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1956Bom1; (1955)57BOMLR288; ILR1955Bom680
Chagla, C.J.1. Petitioners No. 2 carried on the activity of running a crossword competition in Bombay prior to August 1948. After August 1948, they transferred their activity to the State of Mysore and they carried on that activity after obtaining the necessary license from that State. The registered office of the petitioners is situated in Bangalore. They own and run a weekly newspaper called the Sporting Star.This paper is printed and published in Bangalore and it contains a crossword prize competition called the R. M. D. C. Crosswords for which entries are received from various parts of India including the State of Bombay. The petitioners have agents and depots in various places in the territory of India, including the State of Bombay, to collect entry forms and fees for being forwarded to the petitioners at Bangalore. The petitioners advertise their crossword prize competition in various publications in various places in India including the State of Bombay.The Legislature of the St...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1955)57BOMLR938
Tendolkar J.1. This is a petition for an appropriate writ, direction or order against the State of Bombay restraining them from enforcing an order of requisition dated February 24, 1954.2. The case of the petitioner is that one Miss Marsh was carrying on a guest and lodging house under the name and style of Marsh Guest House in flat No. 3 on the ground floor of a building known as Jenkins House at Henery Road, Colaba, By a deed of assignment dated October 6, 1951, the said Miss Marsh sold the said business for the petitioner together with its goodwill and tenancy rights for a consideration of Rs. 6,000. The petitioner himself took in boarders after he became the owner of the said boarding house and the flat was being used as a lodging house all along right upto the time when the order of requisition was made. It is the petitioner's contention that the flat having been used as a lodging house it did not constitute 'premises' within the meaning of the definition of that Word in the Bomba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1959)61BOMLR660
Shelat, J.1. This appeal raises two questions under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. They are, whether the State Government, where it has taken over management of lands belonging to a landholder under Chapter IV of the Act, is liable to render an account of its management during the pendency of the management, and secondly whether a suit filed by a landholder for accounts can be entertained by a civil Court.2. By an Indenture of grant and demise dated November 7, 1870, the Secretary of State in Council granted and demised certain lands, hereditaments and premises therein described to one Ramehandra Laxinanji of Bombay for a term of 999 years on certain terms and conditions therein contained. By diverse transfers made subsequently the plaintiff-company became the owner of part of these lands, situate at Bhayandar, Mira and Ghodbunder, aggregating in all to about 7000 acres. The plaintiff-company took over possession of these lands in 1949 and thereafter managed them ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)74TTJ(Mumbai)624
ORDERPradeep Parikh, A.M.All these five appeals by the assessee arise out of five separate orders of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), dated 28-11-1995, 24-7-1996, 30-7-1997, 28-7-1998, and 29-10-1999, for assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively. Approval of the committee on disputes permitting the assessee to pursue the appeals before the Tribunal is placed on record for the assessment years in question. Since the point of dispute is common in all the appeals, they are being disposed of by this combined order for the sake of convenience.2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are quite narrative and argumentative which is contrary to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Rules. However, the common issue is that the assessee in all these appeals is aggrieved against inclusion of interest on debentures, bonds and Government securities in the total amount of interest on loans and advances and subjecting it to interest-tax under the Interest Tax Act...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
1 Rule. 2 The Respondents waive service. 3 By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. 4 By this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioners are challenging the order dated 14.12.2012 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 41st Court, Shindewadi, Dadar (East), Mumbai-14 in Case No.4100087/SW/2012 whereby he issued the process for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1), 3(3), 3(4) r/w 36 of the Maharashtra Fire Prevention and Life Safety Measures Act, 2006 (for short the said Act). This process was issued on a complaint which was lodged by the Respondent No.2 /Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai. 5 The complaint alleges that on 02.12.2012 at about 3:33 a.m., the officer concerned of Watch Room of Colaba Fire Station received a message from the Control Room to attend the Fire Call at Jolly Maker-I Cooperative Housing Society as fire broke out therein. The officer concerned had atte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(2)BomCR129; [1991(62)FLR530]; (1992)ILLJ807Bom
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution takes various contentions in respect of Notification dated October 31, 1985 annexed at Ex.E being annexure to the petition. 2. Petitioners are owners of what is described as 'tea shop' and an association of such owners doing business in the preparation, distribution and sale of the beverage tea in Greater Bombay. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' - is a piece of legislation enabling fixing of minimum rates of wages in certain employments. At the time the Act was introduced, it had a Schedule consisting of two parts, being know as 'Part I' and 'Part II'. These parts did not include employment in hotels, restaurants and eating houses. By the Minimum Wages (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 1960 Part I of the Schedule was further amended to include :- 'Employment in any residential hotel, restaurant or eating house as defined in the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. (shops Act)' 'Restaurant or eati...
Tag this Judgment!