CORPORATION OF CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION OF CITY OF NAGPUR CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION Vs. ITS EMPLOYEES:FULSING MISTRY:N H MAJUMDAR
LAWS(SC)-1960-2-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on February 10,1960

CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NAGPUR,CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION Appellant
VERSUS
ITS EMPLOYEES,FULSING MISTRY,N.H.MAJUMDAR Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

RAINBOW STEELS LIMITED MUZAFFARNAGAR AND BIRLA COTTON SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS LIMITED DELHI VS. C S T U P AND STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-1981-1-6] [EXPLAINED AND DISTINGUISHED (1960) 2 SCR 942 : : (1960) 1 LJ 523]
OM PARKASH JHUMMAN LAL VS. LABOUR COURT [LAWS(DLH)-1967-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
R N MITTAL MR JUSTICE RETD VS. GOVERNMENT OF THE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-1999-3-21] [REFERRED]
KHAMBHALIA MUNICIPALITY VS. CHUNILAL BHAGWANJI [LAWS(GJH)-1968-11-12] [REFERRED]
DHARI GRAM PANCHAYAT VS. SAFAI KAMDAR MANDAL RAJKOT [LAWS(GJH)-1970-4-8] [REFERRED]
SAURASHTRA MAZOOR MAHAJAN SANGH RAJKOT VS. D M VIN [LAWS(GJH)-1972-12-5] [REFERRED]
PETLAD NAGARPALIKA PETLAD VS. RAJRATNA NARANBHAI MILLS COMPANY LIMITED IN LIQUIDATION [LAWS(GJH)-1973-9-6] [CASES REFERRED]
PORBANDAR NAGAR PALIKA VS. V G PATEL CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT 1972 [LAWS(GJH)-1974-12-11] [CASES REFERRED]
NAVSARI DISTRICT PANCHAYAT VS. SUMANBHAI MORARBHAI PATEL [LAWS(GJH)-2002-4-36] [REFERRED]
PRABHARI ADHIKARI NAGAR PALIKA VS. RAMESH CHANDRA [LAWS(ALL)-1990-11-13] [REFERRED TO]
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD VS. AMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(ALL)-1993-1-50] [REFERRED TO]
SANT KUMAR DUBEY VS. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL IV [LAWS(ALL)-1996-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
HAL EDUCATION SOCIETY VS. JITENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(ALL)-1999-8-26] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. DEEP CHANDRA [LAWS(ALL)-2003-11-182] [REFERRED TO]
K B HIDES VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2003-12-60] [REFERRED TO]
U P FOREST CORPORATION VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT U P RAMPUR [LAWS(ALL)-2004-12-170] [REFERRED TO]
PRINCIPAL AMAR SHAHEED INTER COLLEGE DEVARAJ SINGH CHAUHAN VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT VINOD KUMAR LATE RAGHUBIR PRASAD [LAWS(ALL)-2005-3-119] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ KUMARI VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-1988-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT U P AGRA [LAWS(ALL)-2008-7-163] [REFERRED TO]
MANNAM THIRUPATHISWAMY VS. ANDHRA PRADESH WAKF BOARD [LAWS(APH)-1985-2-13] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD HYD VS. LABOUR COURT HYD [LAWS(APH)-2002-4-76] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL REMOTE SENSING AGENCY VS. ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT [LAWS(APH)-2002-8-105] [REFERRED TO]
KANNAM VENKATI VS. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER [LAWS(APH)-2010-11-42] [REFERRED TO]
RABINDRA NATH SEN VS. FIRST INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-1962-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
N R MUKHERJEE VS. ARNOLD HARTMAN JUST [LAWS(CAL)-1960-6-24] [REFERRED TO]
B KRISHNA BHAT VS. BANGATORE DEVETOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(KAR)-1991-1-28] [REFERRED TO]
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE KADUR VS. K S NIRVANAPPA [LAWS(KAR)-1998-1-17] [REFERRED TO]
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE VS. A NAGARAJ [LAWS(KAR)-2000-7-33] [REFERRED TO]
DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT VS. T K GIRIJA [LAWS(KAR)-2006-3-103] [REFERRED TO]
KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD TRIVANDRUM VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL TRIVANDRUM [LAWS(KER)-1963-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI J D TYTLER VIRENDER SAXENA VS. RAM NATH [LAWS(SC)-1963-4-19] [RELIED ON]
UNION OF INDIA VS. LADULAL JAIN [LAWS(SC)-1963-5-6] [RELIED ON]
MANAGEMENT OF THE FEDERATION OF INDIAN CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY VS. THEIR WORKMAN SHRI R K MITTAL [LAWS(SC)-1971-11-29] [REFERRED TO]
BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD VS. A.RAJAPPA [LAWS(SC)-1978-2-19] [FOLLOWED]
BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD VS. A.RAJAPPA [LAWS(SC)-1978-2-19] [FOLLOWED]
DOYPACK SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION NEW DELHI NARESH KLJMAR PARTI DOYPACK SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED SWADESHI MINING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1988-2-33] [RELIED ON]
DES RAJ VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-1988-4-59] [RELIED ON]
ANIL KUMAR NEOTIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1988-4-67] [CITED]
KARNANI PROPERTIES LIMITED VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(SC)-1990-8-55] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS VS. JAGANNATH MARUTI KONDHARE [LAWS(SC)-1995-12-31] [RELIED ON]
PHYSICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY VS. K G SHARMA [LAWS(SC)-1997-4-31] [RELIED ON]
BOMBAY TELEPHONE CANTEEN EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION PRABHADEVI TELEPHONE EXCHANGE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1997-7-149] [CONSIDERED]
GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM VS. SRINIVASA RAO [LAWS(SC)-1997-11-131] [REFERRED TO]
COIR BOARD ERNAKULAM COCHIN VS. INDIRA DEVI P S [LAWS(SC)-1998-3-39] [REFERRED TO]
SAMISHTA DUBE VS. CITY BOARD ETAWAH [LAWS(SC)-1999-2-125] [RELIED ON]
COMMON CAUSE A REGISTERED SOCIETY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1999-8-44] [REFERRED]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VS. FEMALEWORKERS MUSTER ROLL [LAWS(SC)-2000-3-41] [REFERRED TO]
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE VS. ASHOK HARIKUNI [LAWS(SC)-2000-9-90] [REFERRED]
PARNANAND VS. NAGAR PALIKA DEHRADUN [LAWS(SC)-2000-11-38] [REFERRED TO]
RUTH SOREN VS. MANAGING COMMITTEE EAST I S S D A [LAWS(SC)-2000-11-71] [REFERRED]
HUSSAN MITHU MHASVADKAR VS. BOMBAY IRON AND STEEL LABOUR BOARD [LAWS(SC)-2001-9-134] [REFERRED]
BALJEET SINGH VS. MANAGEMENT OF STATE FARMS MANAGEMENT OF INDIA LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2008-7-44] [REFERRED TO]
A P SHAH VS. B M INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [LAWS(GJH)-1985-7-34] [REFERRED TO]
P W D EMPLOYEES UNION VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1986-7-1] [REFERRED TO]
J J SHRIMALI VS. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MEHSANA [LAWS(GJH)-1988-8-20] [REFERRED TO]
VINODRAI N RATNOTAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1992-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
H K MAKWANA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1994-4-1] [REFERRED]
GUJARAT FOREST PRODUCERS GATHERERS and FOREST WORKERS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2004-4-42] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL VS. INDUSTRIAL COURT [LAWS(MPH)-1962-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
M P SHARMA VS. INDUSTRIAL COURT [LAWS(MPH)-1967-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
AD HOC COMMITTEE THE INDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY VS. RADHABAI [LAWS(MPH)-1976-2-8] [REFERRED TO]
WORKMEN OF DANDAKARANYA PROJECT VS. DANDAKARANYA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(ORI)-1974-7-9] [REFERRED TO]
WORKMEN EMPLOYED IN THE MADRAS PINJRAPOLE VS. MANAGEMENT OF THE MADRAS PINJRAPOLE [LAWS(MAD)-1962-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
MADRAS PINJRAPOLE VS. THEIR WORKMEN [LAWS(MAD)-1966-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
T K MENON AND CO VS. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER [LAWS(KER)-1966-3-19] [REFERRED TO]
MAHILA SAMITI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-1988-1-3] [REFERRED TO]
IMRAT VS. LANJUA [LAWS(MPH)-1990-3-4] [REFERRED TO]
D PADMANABHAN VS. STATE OF TAMILNADU [LAWS(MAD)-1975-11-3] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH BHARGAWA VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1993-2-27] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT [LAWS(MPH)-1993-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
S BAGIANATHAN VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU RURAL [LAWS(MAD)-1983-6-36] [REFERRED TO]
BHASKARAN VS. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER [LAWS(KER)-1982-7-3] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRE OF INDIAN TRADE UNION VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2002-1-8] [REFERRED TO]
UMAYAMMAL VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1982-10-30] [REFERRED TO]
KARTHIYAYANI VS. UNION OF INDIA UOI [LAWS(KER)-1983-8-33] [REFERRED TO]
SIRUR MUNICIPALITY GHODNADI DISTRICT POONA VS. WORKMEN SIRUR MUNICIPALITY [LAWS(BOM)-1960-4-14] [REFERRED TO]
FIRM TULSIRAM SADANAND SARDA VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR NAGPUR [LAWS(BOM)-1960-12-2] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. A K GHOSH [LAWS(MPH)-2003-5-21] [REFERRED TO]
BALLARPUR COLLIERIES COMPANY VS. STATE INDUSTRIAL COURT [LAWS(BOM)-1962-9-20] [REFERRED TO]
GRAM PANCHAYAT SAWARGAON VS. JAMNAPRASAD RAGHUNATH PRASAD [LAWS(BOM)-1967-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
JALPUR DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY VS. SHARAD SHRIVASTAVA [LAWS(MPH)-2004-8-56] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA KESHRICHAND FULADI AND GIRDHAR S O LAXMAN BUNDELE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AKOLA [LAWS(BOM)-1984-9-39] [REFERRED TO]
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF BOMBAY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1989-10-3] [REFERRED TO]
CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE ASSOCIATION VS. GOVERMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2000-7-14] [REFERRED TO]
MAHILA GRIHA UDYOG LIJJAT PAPAD KENDRA AMRAVATI VS. RATNAMALA D KOKEN [LAWS(BOM)-1995-3-65] [REFERRED TO]
RATILAL B RAVJI VS. TATA SPORTS CLUB [LAWS(BOM)-1997-7-60] [REFERRED TO]
CIPRIANO AGNELO RIBEIRO VS. DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES GOVT OF GOA [LAWS(BOM)-1998-9-71] [REFERRED TO]
JAYESH DAYARAM BHOIR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA,THROUGH THE SECRETARY [LAWS(BOM)-2012-6-7] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER VS. MALLIKA [LAWS(MAD)-2009-12-49] [REFERRED TO]
WORKMEN OF FIRE BRIGADE SECTION OF THE MUNICIPAL VS. K L GOSAIN [LAWS(P&H)-1969-7-5] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SAURASHTRA MAZDOOR SANGH [LAWS(GJH)-2003-7-65] [REFERRED]
SOMDUTT VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-1976-5-8] [REFERRED TO]
RED LIGHT ON THE CARS OF THE HONBLE JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-1993-4-45] [REFERRED TO]
NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY GHAZIABAD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT GHAZIABAD [LAWS(ALL)-2003-11-145] [REFERRED TO]
R SREENIVASA RAO VS. LABOUR COURT HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1989-7-39] [REFERRED TO]
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD TRIVANDRUM VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1962-11-13] [REFERRED TO]
GULABSINGH CHAUHAN VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1983-7-30] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. GOVIND CHANDRA PANI [LAWS(ORI)-1995-1-42] [REFERRED TO]
ORISSA CEMENT LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ORI)-1995-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
ASISH KUMAR ROY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-1999-4-14] [REFERRED TO]
SAKHARAM NARAYAN KHERDEKAR VS. CITY OF NAGPUR CORPORATION [LAWS(BOM)-1962-9-12] [REFERRED TO]
P VISWANATHAN VS. A K BURMAN [LAWS(CAL)-2002-10-28] [REFERRED TO]
S P M EMPLOYEES UNION VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2010-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH RAJAK VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2012-5-68] [REFERRED TO]
ANNA PANDURANG VAIDYA VS. NAGPUR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE [LAWS(BOM)-2009-6-111] [REFERRED TO [ 8 ]]
ACHALDAS VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL JODHPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-1971-3-3] [REFERRED TO]
SOMU KUMAR CHATTERJEE VS. DISTRICT SIGNAL [LAWS(PAT)-1969-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1974-4-17] [REFERRED TO]
BIJOY KUMAR BHARTI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1983-8-7] [REFERRED TO]
SHEO SHANKAR JHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1989-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
JAMSHEDPUR NOTIFIED AREA VS. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL [LAWS(PAT)-1991-3-36] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. KIDAR NATH [LAWS(P&H)-1998-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
BOKARO STEEL PLANT OF STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT [LAWS(PAT)-1999-3-54] [REFFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. JAI KISHAN [LAWS(P&H)-2000-4-1] [REFERRED TO]
BHAIYA RAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-4-30] [REFERRED TO]
BHIVA RAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-4-7] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL BOARD RAISINGH NAGAR VS. HARISH CHANDRA JOSHI [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-2-18] [REFERRED TO]
ASIF USMANBHAI PIPARWADIA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2013-3-255] [REFERRED TO]
HOWRAH MUNICIPALITY VS. MANSA DAS DEY [LAWS(SC)-1965-3-51] [REFERRED TO]
T.SHARATH VS. GOVT. OF A.P. [LAWS(APH)-2013-12-1] [REFERRED TO]
RANGE FOREST OFFICER VS. GALABHAI KALUBHAI DAMOR [LAWS(GJH)-2011-3-232] [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL SABIR KHAN AHMED KHAN VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL [LAWS(BOM)-1969-1-5] [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN, TOWN AREA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2013-9-234] [REFERRED TO]
V.T.K. ESTATE & PALACE FUND EMPLOYEES UNION VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1960-8-48] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. ML OUTSOURCING SERVICES (P) LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-2014-9-62] [REFERRED TO]
CITRIX SYSTEMS ASIA PACIFIC PTY. LIMITED VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(AR)-2012-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
THE TAMIL NADU NON-GAZETTED GOVERNMENT OFFICERS UNION, MADRAS AND ANR. VS. THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-1961-10-37] [REFERRED TO]
THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, BANGA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-1971-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-1972-4-41] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL BOARD THROUGH DISTRICT ELECTIVE OFFICER VS. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND ADDITIONAL LABOR COMMISSIONER AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-1986-2-57] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PHAL VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2015-5-247] [REFERRED TO]
BISHAN DASS AND OTHERS VS. THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, SAMALKHA, THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-1988-7-61] [REFERRED TO]
FATHER THOMAS ANTHONYSAMY AND ORS. VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-5-83] [REFERRED TO]
VICE CHANCELLOR, KURUKSHETRA AND ORS. VS. RAJ RANI AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-194] [REFERRED TO]
THE MANAGEMENT OF BIHAR KHADI GRAMODYOG SANGH, MUZAFFARPUR VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR & OTHERS [LAWS(PAT)-1976-2-26] [REFERRED TO]
THE MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, PATIALA VS. THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-1971-3-33] [REFERRED TO]
NIRANJANLAL BHARGAVA AND CO. VS. DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-1979-3-92] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. VIRENDRA PRASAD [LAWS(CAL)-1986-12-29] [REFERRED TO]
P.M. DUMBHARE AND OTHERS VS. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH MAHARASHTRA STATE, POONA [LAWS(BOM)-1971-3-31] [REFERRED TO]
MEHKAR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MEHKAR VS. MUNICIPAL OCTROI EMPLOYEES UNION, MEHKAR AND ANOTHER [LAWS(BOM)-1974-9-24] [REFERRED TO]
CO VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, JEYPORE AND OTHER [LAWS(ORI)-2009-10-100] [REFERRED TO]
ADMINISTRATOR OF CITY OF NAGPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CIVIL LINE, NAGPUR VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR [LAWS(BOM)-1975-3-29] [REFERRED]
ANAND TRANSPORT CO (PRI ) LTD RAIPUR AND ANOTHER VS. BOARD OF REVENUE M P , GWALIOR AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-1962-3-33] [REFERRED]
GRAHAMS HOMES AT KALIMPONG VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-1976-6-41] [REFERRED]
TILAK RAJ OF CHANDIGARH VS. HARYANA SCHOOL EDUCATION BOARD BHIWANI [LAWS(NCD)-1991-9-43] [REFERRED]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS VS. AMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(ALL)-1992-3-89] [REFERRED]
ZILA PARISHAD FEROZEPUR VS. LABOUR COURT PATIALA [LAWS(P&H)-1980-3-92] [REFERRED]
ZILA PARISHAD VS. H S AHLUWALIA [LAWS(P&H)-1982-12-49] [REFERRED]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. RAMESH DASS AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2008-9-264] [REFERRED]
NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD SHAMSABAD AGRA VS. LABOUR COURT U.P AGRA [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-36] [REFERRED TO]
KULDEEP & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-7-98] [REFERRED TO]
GANPATI ROPEWAYS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-5-16] [REFERRED TO]
LEGAL HERIS OF DECD.UMEDMIYA R RATHOD VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-8-205] [REFERRED TO]
RANE TRW STEERING SYSTEM LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENTRAL TAX [LAWS(MAD)-2018-2-1234] [REFERRED TO]
NAGAR NIGAM GHAZIABAD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT II [LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-217] [REFERRED TO]
UOI VS. RAJU KUMAR SHAH [LAWS(DLH)-2020-1-51] [REFERRED TO]
UOI VS. RAJU KUMAR SHAH [LAWS(DLH)-2020-1-252] [REFERRED TO]
DYANI ANTONY PAUL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-12-254] [REFERRED TO]
ST. ANNS COLLEGE FOR WOMEN VS. STATE OF TELAGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-11-14] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Subba Rao, J. - (1.)This batch of three connected appeals raises the question whether and to what extent the activities of the Corporation of the City of Nagpur come under the definition of "industry" in S. 2 (14) of the C. P. and Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act).
(2.)The appellant is the Corporation of the City of Nagpur constituted under the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 (Madhya Pradesh Act No. 2 of 1950). Disputes arose between the Corporation and the employees in various departments of the Corporation in respect of wage scales, gratuity, provident fund, house rent, confirmation, allowances etc. The Government of the State of Madhya Pradesh by its order dated October 23, 1956, referred the said disputes under S. 39 of the Act to the State Industrial Court, Nagpur and the reference was numbered as Industrial Reference No. 18 of 1956. The appellant filed a statement before the Industrial Court questioning the jurisdiction of that Court, inter alia, on the ground that the Corporation was not an industry as defined by the Act. On February 13, 1957, the Industrial Court made a preliminary order holding that the Corporation was an industry and that the further question whether any department of the Corporation was an industry or not, would be decided on the evidence. The appellant challenged the correctness of that order by filing a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur, but that petition was dismissed, as the award was made before its hearing. On June 3, 1957, the Industrial Court made an award holding that the Corporation was an industry and further that all departments of the Corporation were covered by the said definition. It also revised the pay scales of the employees and accepted the major demands made by them. On July 15, 1957, the appellant again filed a petition in the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur, questioning the validity and the correctness of the said award. A division bench of the said High Court, by its order dated September 11, 1957, rejected the contention of the appellant that the Corporation was not an industry as defined by the Act and remanded the case to the State Industrial Court to decide the activities of which departments of the Corporation fell within the definition of "industry" given in the Act and to re-examine the schedules and categories of persons and to restrict the award to the persons concerned within the definition of the word "industry" in the Act. On remand, the said Industrial Court scrutinized the activities of each of the departments of the Corporation and held that all the departments of the Corporation, except those dealing with (i) assessment and levy of house-tax, (ii) assessment and levy of octroi, (iii) removal of encroachment and removal and pulling down of dilapidated houses, (iv) prevention and control of food adulteration, and (v) maintenance of cattle pounds, were covered by the definition of "industry" under the Act. It further gave findings in regard to the disputes between the parties and also as to the persons entitled to the reliefs. It is not necessary to give the particulars of the findings arrived at or the reliefs given by the Industrial Court, as nothing turns upon them in this appeal. The appellant by special leave filed in this Court Civil Appeal No. 143 of 1959 against the award of the Industrial Court. It also filed in this Court by special leave Civil Appeal No. 144 of 1959 against the order of the High Court holding that the activities of the Corporation came under the definition of "industry" in the Act and remanding the case to the Industrial Court for decision on merits in respect of each of the activities of the Corporation.
(3.)Civil Appeal No. 545 of 1958, the third appeal in this batch, arises out of a reference made by the State Government of Madhya Pradesh in regard to the disputes between the appellant, i.e., the Corporation of the City of Nagpur, and the employees of the Corporation in the Fire Brigade Department, representing themselves and other employees. The said reference was numbered as Industrial Reference No. 1 of 1957. As there was overlapping of the disputes raised in Industrial Reference No. 18 of 1956 and Industrial Reference No. 1 of 1957, the Industrial Court heard both the references together and, by consent, the evidence in Reference No. 18 of 1956 was treated as evidence in Reference No. 1 of 1957. On December 14, 1957, an award was made in Reference No. 1 of 1957 and it was based on the findings in the award made in Reference No. 18 of 1956. The Industrial Court held that the Fire Brigade Department was an industry within the meaning of the Act and, on that basis, gave the necessary reliefs to the employees.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.