SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(SC) 343

Y.V.CHANDRACHUD, P.K.GOSWAMI, A.C.GUPTA
Hindustan Steel LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Orissas – Respondent


Judgment

GUPTA, J.:- Respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5 had been employed as Head Time Keepers in the Rourkela Unit of Hindustan Steel Limited, appellant herein, The third and the fourth respondents were appointed on September 24, 1959 and September 14, 1959 respectively, each for a period of three years. The fifth respondent was also appointed for a period of three years from July 15, 1957 but as Time Keeper, not Head Time Keeper. In his case the period was extended after the expiry of three years from time to time till October 15, 1962. In the meantime he had been promoted from Time Keeper to Head Time Keeper with effect from 3-11-1960. Pursuant to an alleged policy to "streamline the organisation and to effect economies wherever possible", the appellant chose not to renew the contracts of service of the Head Time keepers who were eight in number including these three respondents. There was no order terminating their services; according to the appellant the termination was automatic on the expirty of the contractual period of service. The aforesaid three respondents raised an industrial dispute through their union, respondent No 6, Rourkela Mazdoor Sabha. the dispute whether the terminat




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top