Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
Oil Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Government of India – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT
1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the following reference made by the Government of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Labour / 1strespondent to the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Hyderabad / 2ndrespondent 1) Whether the demand of the K.G. Project, O.N.G.C. Ltd. Security Guards Workers Union, Narsapur for regularization of services of their 188 member workmen (as per list) and also for reinstatement and regularization of their 163 workmen (as per list) who were terminated arbitrarily by the management of ONGC K.G. Basin, Rajahmundry is legal and / or justified? If so to what relief the concerned Union is entitled?
2) Whether the demand of the K.G. Project, O.N.G.C. Ltd. Security Guards Workers Union, Narsapur for introducing 'Direct Payment System' by the management of O.N.G.C. Ltd. K.G.Basin, Rajahmundry to their member workmen who are deployed through various contractors is legal and / or justified? IF not, to what relief the concenred Union is entitled?
2. PETIIONER'S CASE
(a) The petitioner is the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limite
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of employment of contract laborers and the determination of employer-employee relationship should be based on evidence and adjudica....
The court established that without clear evidence of direct employment, claims of an employer-employee relationship under contract labour provisions cannot succeed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the test to determine direct employment of employees by the principal employer, focusing on the payment of salary and the contro....
The determination of employment relationships and the validity of contracts lies within the jurisdiction of the industrial adjudicator, particularly when claims of sham contracts are raised.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for contract labourers to comply with the terms and conditions stipulated for regularisation and permanent absorption, including....
The Labour Court's determination that a sham contract exists may classify workers as employees of the principal employer, thereby validating their claims for service conditions and protections under ....
The industrial tribunal is tasked with determining the nature of employment and adjudicating disputes despite any ambiguity in the reference, reinforcing labor rights and ensuring timely resolution.
Section 10 of CLRA reads as prohibition of employment of contract labour.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the workers were deemed employees of the Petitioners and that the Petitioners' actions constituted unfair labor practices under the Industrial....
ANZ Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Union of India
-
Read summary
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.