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

2001 Supreme(Bom) 900

NISHITA MHATRE
Goodlass Nerolac Paints Limited – Appellant
Versus
Paints Employees Union – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Smt. NISHITA MHATRE, J.:---The short question involved in this writ petition is whether an employer can deduct wages of a workman on the basis of the judgment of the Apex Court in (Bank of India v. T.S. Kelawala others)1, reported in 1990 C.L.R. (S.C.)748 for the reason that the workman has not performed his part of the contract by working although he was present on duty.

2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :-

The petitioner which is a paint manufacturing company employs several workmen in its establishment. Several settlements have been signed between the petitioner company and the respondent union. It is the case of the respondent that as they did not to the line of the management, the petitioner sponsored another trade union in its establishment and indiscriminately and under some pretext or the other started effecting deduction in the wages of workmen who were members of the respondent union. Two workmen, Puran Baldeo and Rameshchandra Ramsevak Kurmi, were working as skilled workers in the Varnish Department. According to the petitioner, on 3rd August, 1993 these two workmen although present on duty did not carry out the work allotte

























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