Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: road transport corporations act 1950 section 31 power to the corporation to spend Page 10 of about 722 results (0.131 seconds)

Jan 20 2001 (HC)

Mohd. HussaIn Vs. Apsrtc, Hyderabad and Another

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(2)ALD78

..... employees of the first respondent herein are governed by the provisions of the road transport corporation act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as 'the act'). section 45 of the act reads thus: 45. (1) a corporation may, with the previous sanction of the state government, make regulations, not ..... terms of the power conferred upon the state under sub-section (3) of section 45 of the act, service regulations of the first respondent-corporation have been framed known as the a.p. road transport corporation employees (service) regulations 1964. regulation 4 of the said regulations reads thus: '4. promotion-- ( ..... on groundsof merit, seniority being considered only where merit is approximately equal.' 6. further, the corporation, upon obtaining prior approval of the state government, framed another set of regulations known as the andhra pradesh state road transport corporation employees (recruitment) regulations, 1966. regulation 2(xiv) and (xv) define 'selection' and ' .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 13 2006 (SC)

M.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT2006(8)SC629; 2006(9)SCALE194; (2006)10SCC736

..... provisions as to madhya pradesh state electricity board, state road transport corporation and stale warehousing corporation.-(1) the following bodies corporate constituted for the existing state of madhya pradesh, namely:(a) the state electricity board constituted under the electricity supply act, 1948;(b) the state road transport corporation established under the road transport corporations act, 1950; and(c) the state warehousing corporation established under the warehousing corporations act, 1962,shall, on and from the appointed day ..... , continue to function in those areas in respect of which they were functioning immediately before that day, subject to the provisions of this section and arrangements for the functioning of such body corporates as may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1988 (HC)

S.V. Shastri Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1988KAR1770; 1988(1)KarLJ408

..... order no. 342 is issued pursuant to the decision of the board of directors of the corporation taken in its meeting held on 27-1-1986 as stated in the same general standing order. the corporation is governed by the road transport corporations act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act'). under sub-section (1) of section 5, the general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs ..... and business of the corporation vest in the board of directors which, with the assistance of its committees and managing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 02 1998 (HC)

Nizam Sugars Officers Welfare Association and Others Vs. Government of ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1998(6)ALD538; 1998(6)ALT507

..... , in which the hon'ble supreme court clearly pointed out that under section 34 of road transport corporation act (64 of 1950), the employee of the former bangalore road transport corporation cannot be regarded as the employee of the road transport corporation, in the absence of their givingany option. the learned advocate-general consistently maintained that the ..... by the appellant university to the manipur university without his consent, notwithstanding any statutory provision to that effect whether in the manipur university act or elsewhere. the contract of service entered into by the respondent was contract with the appellant university and no law can convert that ..... of india. the learned advocate-general relying upon the andhra pradesh prohibition of absorption ofempioyees of state government/public sector undertakings into public service act, 1997, further contended that the petitioners cannot claim their absorption in respondent no.2 - company after the unit in which they were working .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1996 (HC)

Ankappa Vs. Management of K.S.R.T.C. Bangalore

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1996KAR3050; 1996(7)KarLJ264

..... . firstly it is urged that the orders imposing punishments have been passed by the respondent-corporation under the provisions of the k.s.r.t.c. (c & d) regulations 1971 framed under section 45 of the road transport corporation act, which according to the petitioners are not applicable to them as they are governed by ..... the standing orders framed under industrial employment standing orders act, 1946. a similar question as to the applicability of the standing orders under the act aforesaid to the employees of the respondent-corporation fell for ..... and are therefore being disposed of by this common order.2. the petitioners are employees of the respondent-corporation who have suffered orders of punishment on the basis of chargesheets served upon them alleging acts of omissions and commission amounting to misconduct. aggrieved, by the said order, they have come up with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1990 (HC)

Sri Konaseema Co-operative Central Bank Ltd., Amalapuram and Another V ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1991]72CompCas588(AP)

..... , when alone they become effective. sections 585 and 586 of the hyderabad municipal corporation act, 1955, correspond to sections 330 and 331 of a.p. municipalities act. (in this connection, it may be noted that regulations which the statutory corporations are empowered to make under various enactments, like road transport corporations act and air corporations act also require that the regulations should not be inconsistent with the rules made under ..... the act, and further that they must be made with the previous approval of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 13 1965 (SC)

Mafatlal Naraindas Barot Vs. Divisional Controller, State Transport Co ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1966SC1364; (1966)ILLJ437SC; [1966]3SCR40

..... leave and that was granted by this court. 6. it may be stated at the outset that the respondent is an autonomous statutory corporation formed under the provisions of the road transport corporations act, 1950. it is not disputed that the appellant could not invoke the provisions of art. 311 of the constitution. 7. the ..... this appeal may be briefly stated. the appellant was a permanent employee of the state transport corporation, gujarat, hereinafter referred to as the corporation. at the material time he was employed as a writer in the visnagar depot of the corporation in mahasana district. on january 15, 1962, the appellant applied to the divisional controller ..... read the relevant regulations which admittedly govern the service conditions of the employees of the corporation. regulation no. 61 provides as follows : 'the service of an employee, who does not hold a permanent appointment in state transport or a lien on a permanent appointment in any government department form which he is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1995 (HC)

Manjanna Vs. K.S.R.T.C.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1996KAR724; 1995(6)KarLJ653

..... to a mandamus to the respondents that the posts in question be awarded to them.3. the learned advocate who represents the corporation has relied heavily on the provisions of section 34 of the road transport corporation act, 1950. what he points out is that the state government is the superior authority and that under this section, the ..... power vests with the government to issue general directions which are required to be followed by the corporation which may include directions relating to the recruitment, ..... in : (1968)iillj144sc , m.s.r.t.c. v. gopinath gundachar, wherein he has pointed out that under section 34 of the act, the corporation is required to act on directions from the state government and that this position was upheld by the court even in a situation where the regulations were yet to be framed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 2009 (SC)

V.V.G. Reddy Vs. Apsrtc, Nizamabad Region and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2009SC1654; JT2009(2)SC36; (2009)IILLJ489SC; 2009(1)SCALE577; (2009)2SCC668; 2009(3)SLJ316(SC); 2009(2)LC621(SC):2009AIRSCW1176:2009(2)LHSC1346

..... order dated 29.10.2002 passed in w.p. no. 21410 of 2002 filed by appellant and others was allowed.3. respondent - corporation is constituted and incorporated under the road transport corporation act, 1950 (64 of 1950). appellant joined its services as a conductor in the year 1981. a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. ..... be interpreted to mean that he would be entitled to claim the benefit of increments notionally.15. we may, however, notice that in a.p. state road transport corporation and ors. v. abdul kareem : (2005)iiillj477sc , this court held:.the labour court specifically directed that the reinstatement would be without back wages. there ..... court directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service, the action of the respondent - corporation in fixing the pay without taking into consideration the notional increments is illegal. it is further held that the corporation cannot rely on any circular or regulation that takes away the plain meaning of the award .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2005 (SC)

V. Ramana Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2005SC3417; 2005(4)AWC3079(SC); [2005(107)FLR262]; (2005)IIILLJ725SC; (2006)2MLJ162(SC); (2005)7SCC338; 2006(1)SLJ77(SC)

..... the factual background is essentially as follows:the appellant was working as a conductor in the organization of the andhra pradesh state road transport corporation. charges were made against him which related to not issuing tickets at the boarding point itself to the passengers who were in ..... who had already travelled were in violation of various regulations contained in the andhra pradesh state road transport corporation employees (conduct) regulations, 1963 (in short 'regulations'). in the karnataka state road transport case (supra) it was held that it is misplaced sympathy by courts in awarding lesser ..... act, 1947 (in short the 'act'). it was further submitted there were minor lapses and smallness of the amount has not been considered in the proper perspective and order of termination of service should not have been passed. learned counsel for the respondent-corporation supported the order of the tribunal and judgment of the, high court. in karnataka state road transport corporation .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //