<?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>2015 (7) TMI 1378 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295614</link>
    <description>A labour award confined to dismissal, reinstatement and back wages could not be expanded to include a separate claim for higher wages, because the Labour Court was limited to the issues actually referred for adjudication. Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act was described as operating only where enforcement of an award would be inexpedient on public grounds affecting national economy or social justice, and not as a route for an individual workman to seek higher wages. The text also notes that Section 17A had been treated by other High Courts as unconstitutional and unenforceable, so no direction could be issued to the State to modify the award.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2021 08:47:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=646518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 1378 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295614</link>
      <description>A labour award confined to dismissal, reinstatement and back wages could not be expanded to include a separate claim for higher wages, because the Labour Court was limited to the issues actually referred for adjudication. Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act was described as operating only where enforcement of an award would be inexpedient on public grounds affecting national economy or social justice, and not as a route for an individual workman to seek higher wages. The text also notes that Section 17A had been treated by other High Courts as unconstitutional and unenforceable, so no direction could be issued to the State to modify the award.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>