Labor Union - Judgment Search Results

Madura Labour Union and Anr. Vs. Madura Mills Workers' Co-operative St ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1954)ILLJ457Mad

society, and that a body of individuals registered as a labour union cannot practise the art of deception. We do not Labour Union, which was a union registered under the Trade Unions Act of the workers of the Madura Mills, at present

Madras Labour Union Vs. Binny Ltd. (Buckingham and Carnatic Mills) and ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1996]87CompCas438(Mad); 1995(1)CTC73; (1995)ILLJ588Mad

Act was attacked in that case was that the Joint Labour Commissioner and Conciliation Officer, who was respondent No. 3 in Labour. Subsequently, the company entered into another agreement with the union, which enabled retrenchment of 92 of its workmen notwithstanding the

Ongc Labour Union Vs. Ongc Dehradun

Court: Supreme Court of India

job was prohibited. According to the appellant, i.e. the ONGC Labour Union, the Government notification for the ONGC was based on OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.5805 OF2019 ONGC LABOUR UNION APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ONGC DEHRADUN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Hrishikesh Roy,

United Labour Union and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1989)91BOMLR770; [1990(60)FLR686]; (1991)ILLJ89Bom

granted on 3rd January, 1975. The registration granted by the Labour Commissioner (Central) was revoked on 2nd May, 1973.4. On 9th as this Court.16. In the case of Heavy Engineering Mazdoor Union v. State of Bihar reported in : (1969)IILLJ549SC the question

Chemical Labour Union Vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises and ors.

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: (1997)1GLR93

under Section 25-O of the Act and the Commissioner of Labour while passing the order dated April 19, 1988 recorded that Court in Vazir Glass Works Ltd. v. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union & Anr., reported in (1996-I-LLJ-962) also does not advance the

ispat Labour Union, Steel Employees Association and Dillip Kumar Mohap ...

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 97(2004)CLT194

learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Asst. Labour Commissioner-cum-Returning Officer submitted that final voter list had already been to conduct verification of membership of 12 eligible registered trade Unions operating in Rourkela Steel Plant, Rourkela through secret ballot for

CochIn Dock Labour Union (by Its Secretary) and ors. Vs. CochIn Dock L ...

Court: Kerala

Reported in: (1967)IILLJ108Ker

Cochin Dock Labour Board. Respondent 1 is the Cochin Dock Labour Board and respondent 2 is its administrative body, namely, the were adopting an obstructive attitude, and that as petitioner 1 union was not a recognized union, there was no question of

Navjagrut Labour Union and anr. Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and ...

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: [2007(115)FLR600]; (2008)IILLJ175Guj

originally initiated by the opponent No. 2 Union before the Labour Court. Once the present proceedings are considered to be the parties regarding the said demand put up by the representative Union, the representative Union got a Reference made to the Industrial

Poona Labour Union (Through Its Secretary) Vs. State of Maharashtra an ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1969)IILLJ291Bom

of receipts in the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Poona, before 7 January 1966 for scrutiny by him. By of the said transport service are members of the petitioner union, and as the transport committee had resolved to make a

Mumbai Labour Union Vs. Indo French Time Industries Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)3BOMLR201; [2002]110CompCas408(Bom); [2001(91)FLR1194]; 2002(2)MhLj405

the industries and equally dangerous to the employers and the labour even to think of conceding such a right to any the present petition for winding up of the company. The union has already resorted to such remedy under the M.R.T.U. and