Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Whether Belated Demand From A Worker To Get Regularized From The Initial Date of Appointment Can He Be Disentitled Under Industrial Disputes Act

    Uploaded by

    Sarthika Singhal Sarthika Singhal
    18 views1 page
    The document discusses whether a worker can be disentitled from demanding regularization from their initial date of appointment under the industrial disputes act. Two cases are cited in favor of disentitlement. The first case found that a dispute referred to the tribunal more than four years after workers were re-employed was not done within a reasonable time. The second case found that there was no rational basis for the government to exercise its powers under section 10 of the act after seven years to revive a matter that had been settled. The document concludes that a dispute cannot be the subject of reference if it has become stale, and making a reference in such circumstances would be incongruous.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Whether belated demand from a worker to get regularized from the initial date of appointment can he be disentitled under industrial disputes act

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses whether a worker can be disentitled from demanding regularization from their initial date of appointment under the industrial disputes act. Two cases are cited in favor of disentitlement. The first case found that a dispute referred to the tribunal more than four years after workers were re-employed was not done within a reasonable time. The second case found that there was no rational basis for the government to exercise its powers under section 10 of the act after seven years to revive a matter that had been settled. The document concludes that a dispute cannot be the subject of reference if it has become stale, and making a reference in such circumstances would be incongruous.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    18 views1 page

    Whether Belated Demand From A Worker To Get Regularized From The Initial Date of Appointment Can He Be Disentitled Under Industrial Disputes Act

    Uploaded by

    Sarthika Singhal Sarthika Singhal
    The document discusses whether a worker can be disentitled from demanding regularization from their initial date of appointment under the industrial disputes act. Two cases are cited in favor of disentitlement. The first case found that a dispute referred to the tribunal more than four years after workers were re-employed was not done within a reasonable time. The second case found that there was no rational basis for the government to exercise its powers under section 10 of the act after seven years to revive a matter that had been settled. The document concludes that a dispute cannot be the subject of reference if it has become stale, and making a reference in such circumstances would be incongruous.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Whether belated demand from a worker to get regularized from the initial date of appointment can he

    be disentitled under industrial disputes act?


    In Favour:
    1. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeals Nos. 317 & 318 of 1950 Decided On:
    08.05.1959 Appellants:Shalimar Works Limited Vs. Respondent:Their Workmen
    Para 13
    We are of opinion that in this particular case the dispute was not referred for adjudication
    within a reasonable time as it was sent to the Industrial Tribunal more than four years after
    even re-employment of most of the old workmen. We have also pointed out that it was open
    to the workmen themselves even individually to apply under s. 33-A in this case; but neither
    that was done by the workmen nor was the matter referred for adjudication within a
    reasonable time. In these circumstances, we are of opinion that the tribunal would be
    justified in refusing the relief of reinstatement to avoid dislocation of the industry and that is
    the correct order to made.

    2. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAC.A. No. 638 of 2000 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil)
    No. 19820 of 1998) Decided On: 28.01.2000
    Appellants: The Nedungadi Bank Ltd.Vs.Respondent: K.P. Madhavankutty and Ors.
    Para 6
    Law does not prescribe any time limit for the appropriate Government to exercise its powers
    under Section 10 of the Act. It is not that this power can be exercised at any point of time and
    to revive matters which had since been settled. Power is to be exercised reasonably and in a
    rational manner. There appears to us to be no rational basis on which the Central
    Government has exercised powers in this case after lapse of about seven years of order
    dismissing the respondent from service. At the time reference was made no industrial dispute
    existed or could be even said to have been apprehended. A dispute which is stale could not be
    the subject-matter of reference under Section 10 of the Act. As to when a dispute can be said
    to be stale would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. When the matter has
    become final, it appears to us to be rather incongruous that the reference be made under
    Section 10 of the Act in the circumstances like the present one.

    You might also like