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

1994 Supreme(SC) 508

B.L.HANSARIA, KULDIP SINGH
Shiv Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K.GOHIL, Ashok Sudan, K.K.GUPTA, NANITA SHARMA, O.P.Sharma, R.C.GUBRELE, SHILA GOEL, Vivek Sharma

Judgment

HANSARIA, J.- Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This Court had been approached by filing the connected SLP by one Shiv Kumar, D.P. Singh and D.H. Woodhead Ltd., Employees Union through Shiv Kumar, its Joint Secretary. An application has, however, been filed, registered as IA No. 3 of 1994, in which it has been averred that Shiv Kumar has settled the matter with the management and the workmen who are challenging the order of the High Court may be taken as those whose names have been indicated in the amended cause title - their number being 21. We allow this IA.

3. These appellants have felt aggrieved at their retrenchment pursuant to the permission given by the specified authority under Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter the Act. The permission granted by the authority came to be challenged before the High Court. It, however, dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.

4. What is required to be noted is that Respondent 3 M/s D.H. Woodhead Ltd. approached the specified authority to seek permission to retrench 79 of its workmen. The authority granted permission to retrench 58 workmen, after t





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