<?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>1957 (5) TMI 51 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459625</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the petition, determining it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari against the decisions in question. The notification dated 27th December 1954 was upheld as valid, being an administrative order. The petitioner&#039;s industry was not specified by the Central Government, making the State Government the appropriate authority. The court found sufficient grounds for the existence of an industrial dispute, validating the notification. Additionally, the Textile Mill Mazdoor Union, Mirzapur, was deemed competent to raise the dispute. Costs were assessed against the petitioner, affirming the validity and jurisdiction of the notification and subsequent decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:11:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=783838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (5) TMI 51 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459625</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the petition, determining it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari against the decisions in question. The notification dated 27th December 1954 was upheld as valid, being an administrative order. The petitioner&#039;s industry was not specified by the Central Government, making the State Government the appropriate authority. The court found sufficient grounds for the existence of an industrial dispute, validating the notification. Additionally, the Textile Mill Mazdoor Union, Mirzapur, was deemed competent to raise the dispute. Costs were assessed against the petitioner, affirming the validity and jurisdiction of the notification and subsequent decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459625</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>