<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1971 (3) TMI 117 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170792</link>
    <description>A charge-sheet is not vague merely because some particulars are omitted where the accusation is otherwise clear, the employee understands the case, and no prejudice is shown. A domestic enquiry will not be treated as unfair or biased absent concrete proof of procedural unfairness or breach of natural justice; even-handed rulings on questions and evidence may support fairness. In proceedings for permission under Section 33(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, limited observations on the merits do not exceed jurisdiction when made to answer issues raised by the party. The permission challenge was therefore rejected and the Tribunal&#039;s decision was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:07:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (3) TMI 117 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170792</link>
      <description>A charge-sheet is not vague merely because some particulars are omitted where the accusation is otherwise clear, the employee understands the case, and no prejudice is shown. A domestic enquiry will not be treated as unfair or biased absent concrete proof of procedural unfairness or breach of natural justice; even-handed rulings on questions and evidence may support fairness. In proceedings for permission under Section 33(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, limited observations on the merits do not exceed jurisdiction when made to answer issues raised by the party. The permission challenge was therefore rejected and the Tribunal&#039;s decision was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>