Blogs about: Industrial Disputes Act
Featured Blog
In 2007 the trade union preferred a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Act for unfair labour practices,-”28. Procedure for dealing with complaints relating to unfair labour practices: (1) Where any person has engaged in or is engaging in any unfair labour practice, then any union or any employee or any employer or any Investigating Officer may, within ninety days of the occurrence of such unfair labour practice, file a complaint before the Court competent to deal with such complaint either under section 5, or as the case may be, under section 7, of this Act: Provided that, the Court may entertain a complaint after the period of ninety days from the date of the alleged occurrence, if good and sufficient reasons are shown by the complainant for the late filing of the complaint.”= “…If an employer deliberately uses his power of promoting employees in a manner calculated to sow discord among his workmen, or to undermine the strength of their union, he is guilty of unfair labour practice.”- We allow the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court in which has merged the order of the Labour Court. However, we make it clear that in implementing the scheme the management of the appellant-company must not bring about any retrenchment of the workmen nor should the workmen be rendered surplus in any way.
Image via Wikipedia REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8607 OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.17414 of 2010) Siemens Ltd. & another .....Appellan… more →
advocatemmmohan
What is the meaning of legal opinion from a lawyer?
wrote 3 months ago: People take legal opinion very lightly. In fact some lawyers also hand out opinions as if they are p … more →
Declaration as to illegal termination
wrote 1 year ago: Comment : In this case the court held that a declaration that a termination of a professor was illeg … more →
Occupied Field.
wrote 1 year ago: Claim of Gratuity made under Section 33C-2 Industrial Disputes Act instead of Payment of Gratuity A … more →
In 2007 the trade union preferred a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Act for unfair labour practices,-"28. Procedure for dealing with complaints relating to unfair labour practices: (1) Where any person has engaged in or is engaging in any unfair labour practice, then any union or any employee or any employer or any Investigating Officer may, within ninety days of the occurrence of such unfair labour practice, file a complaint before the Court competent to deal with such complaint either under section 5, or as the case may be, under section 7, of this Act: Provided that, the Court may entertain a complaint after the period of ninety days from the date of the alleged occurrence, if good and sufficient reasons are shown by the complainant for the late filing of the complaint."= "...If an employer deliberately uses his power of promoting employees in a manner calculated to sow discord among his workmen, or to undermine the strength of their union, he is guilty of unfair labour practice."- We allow the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court in which has merged the order of the Labour Court. However, we make it clear that in implementing the scheme the management of the appellant-company must not bring about any retrenchment of the workmen nor should the workmen be rendered surplus in any way.
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPE … more →
Notice (u/s 9A of ID Act) not required to correct a mistake in payment of salary
wrote 1 year ago: Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act refers to the steps that an employer should take before wi … more →
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS (REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) ACT 1996
— 1 comment
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia BUILDINGS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS (REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT AND CONDITION … more →
The Supreme Court has clearly held that after the introduction of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act with effect from 15.12.1971, the Labour Court has the power of an Appellate Court and it can also re-appreciate the evidence and come to different conclusion if the situation so warrants. The earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited and another v. Workmen, AIR 1958 SC 130 was specifically held to be not holding the field in view of the introduction of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The scope of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act came to be explained by the Supreme Court in Workmen of Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. v. Management, [1973] 1 SCC 813 : 1973 I LLJ 278. The Supreme Court in the said judgment has observed as follows: ".. The words
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.9.2011 CORAM: THE HON … more →
Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984-Customary bonus abolished-Provisions added to various Acts-State Bank of India Act, 1955-Section 43-A-State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Acts, 1959-Section 50-A-Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970-Section 12-A-Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980-Section 12-A-Amendment Act enacted during pendency of a writ petition filed against award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, previously confirming payment of customary bonus-Writ petition dismissed and award attained finality-Appellant filed writ petition challenging the Amendment Act-Dismissed by High Court-On appeal Held, there is distinction between encroachment on the judicial power and nullification of the effect of a judicial decision by changing law retrospectively, the former is outside the competence of legislature but the latter is permissible-Bank possessed power to change and determine the terms and conditions of services of its employees-Award under the Industrial Disputes Act cannot have the effect of preventing the Parliament for all times to come from amending the law on the foundation of which the award was made-Amended provision operates notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, including the Industrial Disputes Act or anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any court or tribunal-Industrial Disputes Act, 1947-Payment of Bonus Act, 1965-Constitution of India, 1950-Part III. Interpretation of Statutes-Operation of Amending Act-Objects and Reasons of a statute to be looked into as an extrinsic aid to find out legislative intent only when meaning by its ordinary language is obscure or ambiguous-Every sovereign legislature possesses right to make retrospective legislation-Public interest at large is one of the relevant considerations in determining constitutional validity of a retrospective legislation-Curative statutes are by their very nature intended to operate upon and affect past transactions. Words and Phrases-``Retroactive'' and ``Retrospective''-Meaning of. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal held that employees of the State Bank of India were entitled to payment of bonus at the rate of one month's substantive pay, every half year. The management of the bank challenged the said award by filing a writ petition. During the pendency of the same the State Bank of India Act, 1955, the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 were amended by the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984 by adding provisions that denied the appellants of customary bonus as per the award. The writ petition of the management was dismissed and the award attained finality. Thereafter, the appellant challenged the said Amendment Act by filing a writ petition in the High Court, which was dismissed. Hence this appeal. Appellant contended that the Amendment Act was unconstitutional as it nullified a judicial decision; that an award passed under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was entitled to greater recognition over the State Bank of India Act; that Parliament was not vested with the power to reduce wages, therefore, the legislation was ultra vires; that bonus being a customary bonus was peculiar to the employees of the bank and a mere fact that other public sector banks were not paying such bonus was of no consequence; that bonus was nothing but deferred wage; that customary bonus was one which was paid de hors the bonus paid under the payment of Bonus Act, 1965; that customary bonus was not profit linked; and that even if the amendment was accepted to be valid it could only have prospective effect. Respondents contended that payment of customary bonus was creating different yardsticks for different public sector banks; that even if a custom acquires a force of law, it could be changed as there was no fundamental right involved in any custom; that bonus cannot be called deferred wages; that the payments were related to profits and they were not uniform and so in that sense it was not really a condition of service or a deferred wage; that the Amendment Act brought in a curative provision, and no retrospective effect has been given to the Amendment Act; that the Industrial Disputes Act had no application as the Parliament had the power to legislate on that aspect; and that the legislature did not override a judicial decision but rendered the same ineffective by enacting a valid law within the legislative field of the legislature.
— 1 comment
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3396 of 2001 PETITIONER: State Bank's Staff Union Madra … more →
provident fund- The respondent bank is under an obligation to pay provident fund to its employees in accordance with the provisions of statutory Scheme. The respondent bank cannot be compelled to pay the amount in excess of its statutory liability for all times to come just because the respondent bank formed its own trust and started paying provident fund in excess of its statutory liability for some time. The appellants are certainly entitled to provident fund according to statutory liability of the respondent bank. The respondent bank never discontinued its contribution towards provident fund according to the provisions of the statutory Scheme.
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPE … more →
Protected workman – If union nominates a workman facing Disciplinary Proceedings
wrote 2 years ago: During the pendency of any Conciliation Proceedings, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, grants spe … more →
Law of Limitation in Labour Law
— 1 comment
wrote 2 years ago: Non-applicability of Limitation Act to monetary claims under labour laws is a matter of general igno … more →
Where would Delhi’s 20,000 something journalists turn to?
— 5 comments
wrote 2 years ago: In Indian media organisations there is no one to turn to for redressal of grievances. Trade unions a … more →
Michael Patrick Considine (1885-1959)
wrote 3 years ago: Author: Frank Farrell Source: Australian Dictionary of Biography: Online Edition CONSIDINE, MICHAEL … more →
Dismantling Media Mafia – Part 6
— 2 comments
wrote 3 years ago: PTI Files Three Writ Petitions Against Orders Of Tribunal Prolongs Them And Then Backs Out Why Were … more →
