<?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>1952 (7) TMI 21 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292837</link>
    <description>An industrial tribunal cannot grant interim relief on matters outside the scope of a Government reference under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Here, the reference was limited to identifying retrenched workers and determining gratuity, termination benefits, and arrear wages, but the tribunal wrongly treated retrenchment itself as still open and ordered wages for all workers until retrenchment was effected. The tribunal also misread a 9-6-1951 settlement as a statutory conciliation settlement binding under the Act, although the record did not show a valid conciliation proceeding. The interim award therefore enlarged the reference, rested on a jurisdictional error, and was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2021 13:07:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1952 (7) TMI 21 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292837</link>
      <description>An industrial tribunal cannot grant interim relief on matters outside the scope of a Government reference under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Here, the reference was limited to identifying retrenched workers and determining gratuity, termination benefits, and arrear wages, but the tribunal wrongly treated retrenchment itself as still open and ordered wages for all workers until retrenchment was effected. The tribunal also misread a 9-6-1951 settlement as a statutory conciliation settlement binding under the Act, although the record did not show a valid conciliation proceeding. The interim award therefore enlarged the reference, rested on a jurisdictional error, and was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>