REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

A.C.SHIVE GOWDA Appellant

V/S

COFFEE BOARD Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE AS IN GRAHAM V. PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSIONER [REFERRED TO]
LONDON COUNTY TERRITORIAL AND AUXILIARY FORCE ASSOCATION V. NICHOLS [REFERRED TO]
U.P. ENGINEERS' ASSOCIATION V. U. P.ELECTRICAL BOARD [REFERRED TO]
GADDE VENKATESHWORA RAO V. GOVERNMENT OF A.P. [REFERRED TO]
TAMLIN V. NANNAFORD [REFERRED TO]
TAMLIN V.HANNAFORD [REFERRED TO]
SEWERAGE BOARD V. RAJAPPA [REFERRED TO]
STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:ASST SUPDT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES BIHAR:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER:COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD JAIPUR VS. MOHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
HEAVY ENGINEERING MAZDOOR UNION VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RUSTOM CAVASJEE COOPER RUSTOM CAVASJEE COOPER T M GURUBUXANI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K RAMADAS SHENOY VS. CHIEF OFFICERS TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL UDIPI [REFERRED TO]
SUKHDEV SINGH THE OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION THE L 1 C LIMITED THE INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPN EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION VS. BHAGATRAM SARDAR SINGH RAGHUVANSHI:THE ASSOCIATION OF CLASS II OFFICERS 0 N G C:SHYAM LAL SHARMA:THE INDUSTRIAL FINANCE CORPN [REFERRED TO]
HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED VS. WORKMEN [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT GLASS WORKS PRIVATE LTD VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY INDIAN NAVAL CANTEEN CONTROL BOARD NEW DELHI VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHAMAN ABDUL GAFUR VS. E PAUL [REFERRED TO]
D P KELKAR VS. AMBADAS KESHAV BAJAJ [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these four writ appeals, preferred against the orders of the Single Judge dismissing the four writ petitions presented under art. 226 of the Constitution of India, by registered owners of coffee estates under the Indian Coffee Act, 1942 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the following question of law arises for consideration: Whether the Coffee Board, is an industry carried on by or under the authority of any department of the Central Government, or is an institution established not for purposes of profit and consequently excepted from the application of the Payment of Bonus Act in view of clauses (iv) and (v) (c) respectively, of S. 32 of the Act?

(2.) The appellants are registered owners of coffee estates under the Act. The first respondent- Coffee Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') has been brought into existence by the Act. With the approval of the Central Government, the Board decided to pay bonus to its employees under the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act (hereinafter referred as the Bonus Act'). This is indicated by the note of the Chairman (Ext-A) turnished to the members of the Board. The particulars of the amounts paid as shown in the note are as follows:

(3.) Sri P. K. Kurian, learned counsel for the appellants, raised the following contentions:

Click here to view full judgment.

A C SHIVE GOWDA Vs. COFFEE BOARD

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address