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

1992 Supreme(Guj) 5

M.S.PARIKH, S.B.MAJMUDAR
MISCELLANEOUS MAZDOOR SABHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.K.CLERK, K.S.Nanavati, MAYANK BUCH

S. B. MAJMUDAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS Spl. C. A. is moved by Misc. Mazdoor Sabha through its Secretary on behalf of its members who were workmen working with respondent No. 3 at the relevant time. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are joined as constituted attornies in charge of the said concern while respondent no. 6 is joined through its Managing Director being parent company whose wholly owned subsidiary is respondent No. 3 industries.

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner-Union is that services of all the employees working with respondent No. 3-Company were terminated illegally on 3-2- 1988 by notice at Annexure b, without following the provisions of Sees. 25f, 25ffa, 25n and 25-0 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act for short) and Sec. 66 of the Bombay Shops and Establishment Act, 1948. Respondent No. 3 was registered as a private company on 20-12-1982. According to the petitioner, one of the objects of the company, as seen from the Articles of Association was to carry on business of manufacturing, preparing for market and/or selling and dealing in mosquito net and allied products. The manufacturing operation of mosquito nets was carried on by the Mosquito netting Plant managed by respondent
























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