Judgments - Pay
THE STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Versus RAVINDRA NATH & ORS.
SH. NARENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED VERSUS RAJESH KUMAR JINDAL & OTHERS
M/s Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of M.P. and others
Ramswaroop Singh Gurjar vs. State of MP & Ors.
M/s S.Kumars Ltd. Vs. Bherulal
Law Laid down - (1) Before effecting change of service conditions of the workman in respect of any matter specified in Fourth Schedule appended to Industrial Disputes Act, notice has to be issued in compliance of section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act. (2) The illegal change in service conditions of the Workman in the manner prejudicial and detrimental to his rights and interest amounts to unfair labour practice, on the part of the Management as detailed in item Nos.6 and 7 of Full Judgment
Dr. Jeevan Yadav Vs. Swapnil & Anr.
Jehangir D. Mehta Vs. The Real Nayak Sakh Sahkari Maryadit and Another
Law laid down - The order or decision of the arbitration council under Section 57 of the Madhya Pradesh Swayatta Sahakarita Adhiniyam, 1999 is an arbitration award and it is not a decree passed by the civil court as defined under Section 2(2) of the CPC, hence the stamp duty as required by the Schedule 1A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1889 is payable for its execution. Full Judgment
N.N. GODFRED & OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
State of M.P. Vs. Rajendra Kumar Jain
Law Laid Down - “Whether a daily-wager who is declared permanent by way of classification, by the employer, merely on completion of 240 days of service as daily-wager, without any judicial intervention is entitled to claim salary alongwith increments in the regular pay-scale admissible to a civil post or is merely entitled to salary equivalent to the minimum of the regular pay-scale without increments and in this backdrop whether the impugned orders granting benefit of regular pay-scale with increments are liable to be Full Judgment
M/s Rajsai Traders & others Versus Vinod
Law laid down - After the stage of Order XXXVII Rule 3(4) of the CPC, first stage is to seek leave from the Court under Rule 5 and if the said leave is granted permitting the defendants to defend unconditionally or on such terms as appear to be just, sub-rule (6) of Rule 3 of Order XXXVII of the CPC would attract “at the hearing of such summons for judgment”. In case leave not applied or refused at the stage of Full Judgment
The Manager, Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Mr. Prayag Modi
Law laid down - Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972- The gratuity is a valuable right of an employee. It is also a property under Article 300A of the Constitution. The gratuity can be withheld only as per act and to the extent permissible under various provisions of Gratuity Act. The allegations established against the petitioner show that he was found guilty of negligence. No allegations relating to riotous or disorderly conduct or for involving moral turpitude were alleged and established. Hence Full Judgment
Pawan Kumar Saraswat and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Union of India and Ors. Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr.
KHAZAN SINGH Vs. DTC
Suresh Mathur(since deceased) through his LRs vs. Yogesh Chawla
Surya Prakash Vs. Smt. Rachna
Law Laid Down - If there is any instance of domestic violence, for which an affirmative or prohibitory order is passed under Section 18 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the provisions of Section 31 of the Act can be invoked. Non-payment of maintenance allowance is also a breach of 'protection order' or 'interim protection order'. The order passed in Sunil @ Sonu vs. Sarita Chawla (Smt.), reported in 2009 (5) MPHT 319 is in accordance with Full Judgment