TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court: Notice Required Before Changing Service Conditions</h1> <h3>U.P.C.U.E.F. Ltd. Versus Cane Commissioner & R.C.C.S. & Ors.</h3> The Supreme Court held that notice under Section 4-I of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1956 was mandatory before altering service conditions. The ... - Issues involved:The judgment involves the following Issues:1. Whether notice under Section 4-I of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1956 was mandatory before altering service conditions.2. Whether the respondent had the power to frame and amend regulations under Section 122 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965.Issue 1: Notice under U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1956:The appellant challenged the change in the definition of 'Crushing Season' affecting employment length and wages. The High Court rejected the writ petition, stating no notice was required as per the Third Schedule. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, finding the change impacted service conditions and required notice under Section 4-I. The change in 'Crushing Season' directly affected wages, falling under the Third Schedule, necessitating notice to affected employees.Issue 2: Power to frame and amend regulations:The Supreme Court did not delve into this issue due to the finding on the first issue. The judgment set aside the High Court's decision, allowing the appellant's writ petition. The Court emphasized the necessity of serving notice before altering service conditions, as mandated by the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1956. The appeal was allowed without costs, with the respondent permitted to amend the 'Crushing Season' definition in compliance with the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
