Niyamskanoon

Posts

Showing posts with the label Case summary

Kamla Devi v. Vasdev, AIR 1995 SC 985

Kamla Devi (Smt) v. Vasdev, AIR 1995 This case interpretation/case summary is written by Ms. Swati Sharma a student at the Faculty of Law (Delhi University) and edited by Mr. Sonu Choudhary . If you also want to publish your articles or case interpretations/summaries, send your work to niyamskanoon09@gmail.com . Case Details PETITIONER : KAMLA DEVI Vs. RESPONDENT : VASDEV DATE OF JUDGMENT : 14/12/1994 BENCH : SEN, S.C. (J) BENCH : SEN, S.C. (J) VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J) BHARUCHA S.P. (J) CITATION : 1995 AIR 985 1995 SCC (1) 356 JT 1995 (1) 142 1994 SCALE (5)295 Introduction The case of Kamla Devi v. Vasdev 1995 is a significant judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India in 1995. This case deals with the interesting issue of whether the rent controller can forgive

Sirsilk Ltd. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (1964) 2 SCR 448: AIR 1964 SC 160 This case interpretation/case summary is written by Mr. Sonu Choudhary , a student at the Faculty of Law (Delhi University) . If you also want to publish your articles or case interpretations/summaries, send your work to niyamskanoon09@gmail.com . Introduction We all have read Section 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which places an obligation on the appropriate Government to publish the report or award made by any board or labour court or tribunal within 30 days of receiving such report or award. Also, we are well acquainted with Section 18(1) of the same Act which had been introduced by Act 36 of 1956. This, Section 18(1), states that any settlement made between the parties shall be binding to them. In the present case, a very interesting issue has come before the Apex court whereby a conflict between both the sections i.e. s.18(1) & s.17(1) has been raised. So please read this case summary

Som Prakash Rekhi v. Union of India, 1981||Case Summary Introduction In Som Prakash Rekhi v. Union of India, 1981 we will understand Article 12 of the Constitution of India which defines the term 'State' in a broad manner and will get to know it's better interpretation produced by the Apex Court. Facts A company named "Burmah Shell Oil Storage Ltd." a government company has been taken over by the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) another government company under the Burmah Shell Act, 1976. The petitioner who was a clerk in the Burmah Shell Company, retired at the age of 50 was entitled to a qualifying pension and was also covered by the scheme under the Employees Provident Fund and Family Pension Act, 1952 which has been deducted by the BPCL on certain grounds as a result the Petitioner moved the Supreme Court under Article 32 while stating that the deduction from his original Pension (Rs.165.99) to Rs. 40.05 is inhuman and illegal and violation

Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra Citation : AIR 1957 SC 264 F acts Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd. (the appellant) employed certain agarias at their salt works. The dispute arose regarding the conditions under which the agarias should be engaged by the appellant in the manufacture of salt. Therefore the dispute was presented before the Industrial Tribunal. Appellant Contentions The agarias were independent contractors and not workmen on the ground that the agarias had power to engage extra labour therefore the State was not competent to refer the present case for adjudication under Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act. Issue Whether the agarias are workmen within the meaning of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947? Case History The Industrial Tribunal favoured the respondent (Agarias) while holding that the Agarias are workmen within the meaning of the Act. The Labour Appellate Tribunal also while dismissing the appeal favoured the responden

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) Case Summary Facts In this landmark case, the female workers employed on a muster roll basis by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) filed a petition seeking maternity benefits. The female workers argued that they should be entitled to the same maternity benefits as regular employees under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. Issue Whether female workers employed on a muster roll basis are entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961? Respondent's Contentions 1. Right to Maternity Benefits : The petitioners contended that the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, which provides maternity benefits to female workers, should be applicable to them despite their muster roll status. 2. Equality and Non-discrimination: They argued that the denial of maternity benefits to muster roll female workers was discriminatory and violated their right to equality under Article 14 and right to life and personal liberty

Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate, AIR 1958 SC 353 Case Summary Introduction The case of Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate involved a dispute between the management of the Dimakuchi Tea Estate and its workers. This case has discussed and cleared the meaning of the expression "any person" used in S.2(K) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of a limited interpretation of the term "any person" thereby excluding the present appellant from the ambit of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947. This decision denied the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to adjudicate the dispute and extended the benefits and protections of the Act to the employers. Facts of the Case The dispute was raised over the termination of the service of Dr K.P. Banerjee, who was appointed as an Assistant Medical Officer in the Respondent's estate (Dimakuchi Tea Estate), on the grounds of being incompetent. Although th

State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh (2005) Case Summary Introduction The present appeal along with other connected cases was made to this 5-Judge Bench on the reference of the 3-Judge Bench of this Court. Factual Background Jai Bir Singh and other respondents were employed by the Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation (UPSWC), a statutory corporation. Their services were terminated without a formal inquiry or adherence to procedures laid out in the Industrial Disputes Act, of 1947. The respondents challenged their termination, claiming it was unjust and that they were entitled to protections under the Industrial Disputes Act as "workmen." Case History This case was referred by the three-judge Bench of this Court to a five-judge Bench after finding different opinions by this Court in two different cases over the same issue of whether the "Social Forestry Department" of State which is a welfare scheme would be covered by the definition of "industry"

Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004) Case Summary Facts It was stated that as a part of retaliatory action to avenge the killing of 56 persons in the Sabarmati Express, an unruly mob burnt down the business named 'Best Bakery' at Vadodara, Gujrat. Zahira was the main eyewitness who lost her family members. She made her statement during the investigation based on which the Chargesheet was filed but she resiled from her statement during the trial. Case History The Trial Court acquitted the accused. She approached the National Human Rights Commission [NHRC] stating that she was turned hostile during the trial because she was threatened by the powerful politicians to not speak against the accused person. Therefore, an SLP under Article 32 was filed by NHRC before the Supreme Court Court. Also, the State, though not up to the mark and with due care, and the appellant filed an appeal before the High Court and one Sahera Banu filed a revision petition before the Hi

Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012) Case Summary Facts Ajmal Kasab, a Pakistani national and a member of the terrorist organisation named " Lashkar-e-Taiba", came to India with 9 others. He carried 12 coordinated shooting and bombing attacks which lasted for four days till 29 Nov 2008 across Mumbai resulting in the death of a total of 175 people with more than 300 injured. After his arrest, he refused to take the services of Indian lawyers and demanded a lawyer from his country. Later on, getting no help from his country, the appellant was convinced to be represented by Indian lawyers. This appeal was raised against the order of the High Court which upheld the conviction order of the Trial Court. The Trial Court relying on the evidences, witnesses and his confessional statement convicted him and sentenced him to death. Contentions of the Appellant's Counsel Fair trial is an essential right of every person, which includes the right to be represe

Rohtas Industries Staff Union v. State of Bihar, AIR 1963 || Case Summary What we will learn Whether the "industrial disputes" cover a dispute raised due to the loss of the employers caused by the strike of the employees. Whether the workers had committed the tort of conspiracy. Whether the workers, who participated in an illegal strike, were protected by S.18 of the Trade Union Act. Whether the company has the right of civil action for damages against the worker. Facts The petitioner, a registered trade Union known as the Rohtas Industries Mazdoor Sangh, went on a strike against the non-payment of bonus and non-implementation of the Shri Jee Jee Bhoy's award by the respondents. The strike ended on an agreement between the parties in which they agreed to settle their dispute through arbitration, as provided under S.10A of the Industrial Dispute Act. The main issue before the arbitrators was whether the workers were liable to get payment for the period of the strike or

R.S. Ruikar v. Emperor, 1935 Case Summary/Brief Facts The appellant was the President of the Nagpur Textile Union, who organized a strike against the Empress Mills, Nagpur for not fulfilling certain conditions settled by them in a previous strike. The appellant in order to make the strike more impactful and to get the involvement of larger members encouraged the members to picket at the mills through speeches. Also, on a complaint from female members, of the harassment by the police, the appellant posted his wife on the gate of a mill with instructions to beat, with her slippers, anyone who interfered with her. The charges under S.7 of the Criminal Amendment Law were made against him for the abetment of picketing and a conviction order was made by the Court. Hence the appellant made a revision petition. Issues Whether the Court was right in making the conviction order. Whether the appellant will get the benefit of S.17 of the Trade Union Act. Contentions of the Appellant By referring

In Re Inland Steam Navigation Worker’s Union, AIR 1936 || Case Summary Facts An application for the registration of the "Inland Steam Navigation Worker’s Union", formed by the employees of all Inland Steamer Services, was rejected by the Registrar on the ground of a declaration made by the General Sec. of the Inland Steam Navigation Worker's Union that this Union was formerly known as RSN and LGN and Ry. Workers' Union which have been declared unlawful under S. 16 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, and had been banned. Therefore the appellant came here under S.11 of the Trade Union Act. Issue Whether the Registrar of the Trade Union was right to pass a decision after relying on the letter presented before the Bengal Government. Ratio Decidendi The Registrar must have to notify and provide an opportunity to defend to the appellant before rejecting the application on the basis of the letter. Section 8 of the Trade Union Act empowers the Registrar to refuse a

The Tamil Nadu Non-Gazetted Government Officers’ Union, Madras v. The Registrar of Trade Unions, AIR 1962||Case Summary Facts The appellant Union was a Service Association of all the Non-gazetted Officers of the Madras Government except the executive officers of police and prison departments. Ten members of the association made an application to the Registrar for registration as a Trade Union. The Registrar rejected the application on the ground that the said association of ministerial employees cannot claim registration as a trade union. Case History In an appeal under S. 11 of the Trade Union to the Court of Learned Judge Rama Chandra Iyer, w hile upholding the order of the Registrar said:- "Workman" under S. 2(h) of the Trade Union Act includes only manual laborers and workers and does not include civil servants. The concept of collective bargaining which is the rationale behind trade unions does not apply to government servants. Also, a trade union has the r

Search This Blog

Niyamskanoon

Posts

Must Read

M.N. Clubwala v. Fida Hussain Saheb, 1964

Kamla Devi v. Vasdev, AIR 1995 SC 985

Sirsilk Ltd. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (1964) 2 SCR 448: AIR 1964 SC 160

Som Prakash Rekhi v. Union of India (1981) 1 SCC 449

Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra AIR 1957 SC 264 : 1957 SCR 152

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) AIR 2000 SC 1274

Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate, AIR 1958 SC 353

State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh (2005) 5 SCC 1

Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004)

Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012)

Rohtas Industries Staff Union v. State of Bihar AIR 1963 Pat. 170

R.S. Ruikar v. Emperor AIR 1935 Nag. 149

In Re Inland Steam Navigation Worker’s Union, AIR 1936

The Tamil Nadu Non-Gazetted Government Officers’ Union, Madras v. The Registrar of Trade Unions, AIR 1962