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>Court allows appeal without costs, emphasizing employee-employer relationship for regularization.</h1> <h3>U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Versus Bijli Mazdoor Sangh and Ors.</h3> The appeal was allowed without costs as the Court found the direction for regularization untenable based on legal principles established in the Uma Devi ... - Issues involved: Challenge to the order passed by a Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court dismissing a writ petition regarding an Award made by the Industrial Tribunal, Uttar Pradesh, in Adjudication Case No. 168 of 1980.Background: Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 were appointed as Chowkidars on daily wage basis, terminated due to construction work completion. Dispute referred to Tribunal, which held termination improper u/s 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 & Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They were reinstated but dispute continued.Adjudication Cases: Respondent No. 2 raised another dispute claiming to be a Pump Operator cum Electrician, seeking salary adjustment. Tribunal found him working as a casual Chowkidar, not as claimed. Appellants challenged various Awards and directions regarding regularization and payment of wages.Legal Arguments: Appellants argued High Court's direction for regularization was untenable post the Uma Devi case, emphasizing Industrial Adjudicator's powers. Respondent's counsel argued Industrial Adjudicator can modify employment terms for industrial peace, differing from civil suits or writ petitions.Court's Decision: Court noted Industrial Adjudicator's power to vary employment terms but not violate Article 14 of the Constitution regarding regularization. Upheld that regularization requires an employee-employer relationship, citing Uma Devi case. Respondent's claim as a Pump Operator was found unsubstantiated, and regularization direction was deemed improper based on Uma Devi case.Conclusion: The appeal was allowed without costs, finding the direction for regularization untenable in light of legal principles established in the Uma Devi case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
