Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1997(75)FLR180]; (1998)IIILLJ231Bom
..... closure section 25(o) or retrenchment under section 25(n) since it related to the factor of public interests as well as interest of the workmen as a whole'. the mahatma expected every industrialists to act as a trustee in today's world, that is but a dream, but does that exonerate the industrialist from his social and moral responsibility of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)404; AIR1996SC2481; 1996CriLJ3274; JT1996(6)SC529; 1996(5)SCALE233; (1996)5SCC216; [1996]Supp3SCR677
..... by this logic all petitions containing this phrase would be deemed contemptuous. even the part of the quotation is from the leading decision of this hon'ble court in maneka gandhi's case.'11. with regard to averments made in item 9, he justified it stating that 'this again is an unresolved question of great legal significance and he cited as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)678; AIR1996SC2462; 82(1996)CLT875(SC); JT1996(6)SC685; 1996(5)SCALE414; (1996)9SCC709; [1996]Supp3SCR808
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, CJ.1. Special Leave granted.2. These appeals seek to challenge: (i) the common judgment and order of the Orissa High Court dated April 4, 1995, arising out of OJC No. 7729 of 1993 and allied matters and (2) the decision of the Central Government dated August 17, 1995 made pursuant to the said judgment of the High Court.3. The appellants in these appeals are the Tata Iron and Steel Company, Limited, (hereinafter called 'T1SCO') and the Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Limited (hereinafter called 'IDCOL'). The principal respondents are the Union of India, the State of Orissa, M/s. Indian Charge Chrome Limited, (hereinafter called 'ICCL'), Indian Metal & Ferro Alloys Limited (hereinafter called 'IMFA'), M/s. Jindal Strips Limited, (hereinafter called 'JSL'), Ferro Alloys Corporation Limited (hereinafter called 'FACOR') and Ispat Alloys Limited.4. The factual matrix of the case is as follows :The appellant, TISCO, is a limited company, one of whose primary obj...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1996)2CALLT183(HC),100CWN900
..... waman rao and ors. v. union of india reported in : air1981sc271 : minerva mills ltd. and ors. v. union of india and ors. reported in : [1981]1scr206 and smt. indira nehru gandhi v. shrt raj naratn reported in : [1976]2scr347 .(c) the act is also not protected under article 31c of the constitution of india inasmuch as interms of the provisions of ..... consideration is as to whether the fundamental right is a basic structure of the constitution of india or not.182. in minerva mill's case (supra) as also indira nehru gandhi's case (supra), it has been held that article 14 is a basic feature of the constitution of india. article 14 and 19 have been excluded from being considered in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All122
1. This suit for partition of moveable and immoveable properties left by late Syed Raza Ali Khan, Nawab of Rampur, rendition of accounts of income, profits, usufructs andbenefits from the said property, and decree for pendente lite and future mesne profits, was filed by the plaintiff in the Court of District Judge, Rampur in the year 1972. As the proceedings in the suit could not make progress for over twenty years in the court of the District Judge, and thereafter Civil Judge, Rampur, the Hon'ble Inspecting Judge for Rampur Sessions Division, during the course of his inspection of the Judge-ship, directed the Registrar to place the matter before Hon'ble the Chief Justice to withdraw the suit for trial before the High Court. The Hon'ble the Chief Justice by his order dated 2-1-1995 assigned the suit to this bench for hearing and disposal.2. In short the pleadings of the plaintiff are, that late His Highness, Maj. Gen. Sir Syed Raza Ali Khan Sahib Bahadur hereinafter referred to as 'the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1997)ILLJ170Mad
Janarthanam, J.1. Certain events and incidents, which formed the backdrop and setting of the present actions - Writ Appeal No. 332 of 1994 and Writ Petitions Nos. 3124, 3125 and 3917 of 1993 better it is, we feel, to relate to have a proper understanding and fine grasp, with ease and grace - of the legal implications or positions to be derived or to flow from the factual matrix, giving rise to certain issues - so moot and complicated in nature - with which, we are now called upon to decide, by giving our anxious consideration. E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited (for short,'the employer') has one of its units located at Ranipet in the State of Tamil Nadu, where sanitary ware, superphospate and insecticides are manufactured. Some of its retired employees filed applications under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act No. 14 of 1947 - for, short, 'the I.D. Act'), before the Labour Court, Madras, claiming pension by alleging that pay ability of pension was a condition of servi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. The First writ petition, in which the petitioner who is an Advocate of this Court and has appeared in person has alleged failure on the part of the Government of Bihar to perform democratic and Constitutional duties including the one contained in part IX of the Constitution of India and thus, according to him it is not being run in accordance with the provision of the Constitution. Accordingly, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Writ in the nature, of writ of mandamus commanding the Union Government to act in terms to Article 355 and/or 356 of the Constitution of India to ensure that the Government of Bihar is run an accordance with the provisions of the constitution and to issue a writ of prohibition or quo warrant to or any other appropriate writ restraining and or commanding the special officer of Chapra Municipality (dissolved on 23.6.1995) (respondent No. 3) from acting and exercising powers in the said capacity after 22.12.1995, by which date th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1997P& H164; (1997)115PLR687
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, J.1. A short but important question which arises for adjudication in this petition is whether the Election Tribunal constituted under the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (hereafter referred to as '1994 Act') has power to restrain elected representatives from assuming office.2. Shri Nanak Singh was declared elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Bhudha Theh, Tehsil Baba Bakala, Block Raiya, District Amritsar in the election held in the year 1992. Sometime in the year 1995 Shri Nanak Singh resigned from the office of Sarpanch. Election to fill the casual vacancy caused in the office of the Sarpanch due to the resignation of Nanak Singh was held on 20th June, 1996 and as per election result declared by the Returning Officer the petitioner has been shown as elected. Annexure P-1 is a copy of the report sent by the Returning Officer to the Election Commission. According to this report the petitioner secured 1511 votes against 955 votes of respondent No. 4 and 6...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1996IVAD(Delhi)507; 66(1997)DLT660; 1996(39)DRJ609
..... was 131 and his date of enrolment was 25th may,1959 and membership no. of manohar lal chawla was 973 with date of enrolment 30th december, 1960 while nand lal gandhi, bhola nath, satya prabha etc. all were enrolled on 31st december, 1960. it would be evident that bhola nath gogia was much junior in the list. this is in ..... would become amenable to the writ jurisidiction of this court at least under article 226 if not under article 32 read with article 12 of the constitution. (27) since maneka gandhi vs . union of india, : [1978]2scr621 , right to life and personal liberty has gained ever expanding meaning and right to shelter also emanating from article 21 was recognised as ..... .71 was not the seniority but file number. out of 360 plots, 342 plots had been allotted to those who enrolled before 25th may, 1959 were senior to n.l. gandhi. he also filed a waiting list position as on 25th december, 1991(annexure r-1). sh. 0m prakash chugh and sh. kamlesh kumar juneja were senior to him, their .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(2)CTC313
ORDER1. The petitioner had entered into an agreement with the first respondent on 24.4.1991 for executing a work of strengthening the weak two lane road reach from KM40/0-52/8 NH5- MC Road including providing of Hard shoulders. That agreement contains arbitration clause which reads as follows:'The arbitrator for fulfilling the duties set forth in the arbitration clause of the standard Preliminary Specification shall be Superintending Engineer of Madurai CMH Circle.Time shall be considered as of the essence of the agreement and the Contractor hereby agrees to commence the work as soon as agreement is accepted by competent authority as defined by the Madras Public Works Department Code. The site (or premises) is handed over to him as provided for in the said condition and agrees to complete the work within eighteen months from the date of such handing over the site (or premises) and to show progress as defined in the tabular statement 'rate of progress' below, subject nevertheless to the...
Tag this Judgment!