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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1280

A.M.AHMADI, B.L.HANSARIA, SUHAS C.SEN
CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS – Appellant
Versus
JAGANNATH MARUTI KONDHARE – Respondent


JUDGMENT

HANSARIA, J.

( 1 ) TWO questions in the main need our determination in this batch of appeals which are by the Chief Conservator of Forests, State of Maharashtra. The first and foremost question is whether Forest Department of the State Government is an "industry" within the meaning of section 2 (j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter the Central Act), which definition has been adopted by the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short the State Act ). We shall have then to address ourselves to the question whether in the cases at hand the employer, namely the State Government, had indulged in unfair labour practice visualised by item 6 of Schedule IV of the State Act, as alleged by the respondents before the Industrial Court, Pune/ahmednagar. If these questions would be answered in affirmative, we would be required to consider without the directions given by the aforesaid Industrial Courts need our interference.

( 2 ) BEFORE applying our mind to the first question, it would be apposite to mention that this point had not been before the Industrial Court and it is because of this that the High Court, on b




























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