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

1993 Supreme(Raj) 491

G.S.SINGHVI
Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. , Ajmer – Appellant
Versus
Labour Court – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:R.C. Joshi, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Virendra Bandhu, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - These three petitions arise out of a common order dated January 5, 1987 passed by the Labour Court, Rajasthan, Jaipur in case No. LCC 35/85, Case No. LCC 124/85, Case No. LCC 125/85 filed by 71 employees claiming overtime wages in terms of the Factories Act, 1948. Since the Labour Court has decided all the three applications by the common order and facts of all these writ petitions are by and large common, I am deciding all these writ petitions by a common order.

2. The facts which are necessary for deciding controversy involved in these writ petitions are that the petitioner Hindustan Machine Tools is a company owned and controlled by the Government of India. It has its factories at various places in India as well as abroad. One of its factories is at Ajmer which is engaged in manufacture of machine tools. This factory is governed by the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 (for short 1948 Act). The respondent - workmen filed three separate applications under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 1947 Act) claiming computation of their overtime wages in terms of Section 59 of 1948 Act. The workman claimed that they had worked overtime and the






























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