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

1965 Supreme(SC) 334

P.SATYANARAYANA RAJU, V.RAMASWAMI, P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, M.HIDAYATULLAH, K.N.WANCHOO
ROHTAK AND HISSAR DISTRICTS ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Judgment

GAJENDRAGADKAR

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been brought to this Court by special leave and it challenges the validity of certain orders passed by the Certifying Authorities in respect of the draft Standing Orders which the appellant, The Rohtak Hissar District Electric Supply Co. Ltd. , had submitted to them for certification. Five respondents have been impleaded to this appeal; they are the State of U. P. Certifying Officer for Standing Orders and Labour Commissioner, U. P. , Kanpur, and three representatives of the employees respectively. At the hearing before us, the employees representatives have not appeared and the appeal has been contested by respondent No. 1 alone.

( 2 ) THE appellant is a Joint Stock Company incorporated under the Companies Act, and it has its registered office at Allahabad. The principal object for which this Company has been incorporated is to carry on the business or generation and distribution of electricity. In accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (No. 20 of 1946) (hereinafter called the Act), the appellant prepared draft Standing Orders in consultation with its employees and submitted the same to th



































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