Polaroid
Home
Practically two a long time just before this, in 1808, Supreme Court Lawyer on returning to Chandigarh following browsing his estates had involuntarily discovered himself in a foremost placement among the Chandigarh Supreme Court Lawyers .

Seasoned Law Firms in Supreme Court of India - Simranjeet Law Associates House Number 815, Sector.

But if they are unconnected with such duties, then no sanction is necessary. The State of Bombay(2 )which also relate to sanction under s. This is the concept of the " minimum wage " adopted by the Committee on Fair Wages. 2(q) defines a strike as meaning a cessation of work by a body of persons employed in any industry acting in combination, or a concerted refusal, or a refusal under a common understanding, of any number of persons who are or have been so employed to continue to work or to accept employment.

11 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules. In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any Government to separate the true from the false for us. 2(q) of the Act or not? Rule 11 of the said Rules reads: It is contended that the Road Transport Authority made an order rendering that the permits of the appellants ineffective without giving them due notice as required by that rule and therefore the said order was invalid.

1310:- "The result then is that whether sanction is necessary to prosecute a public servant on a charge of criminal misappropriation, will depend on whether the acts complained of hinge on his duties as a public servant. Is this pen-down strike a strike within s. - " The basic wage there approximates to a bare minimum subsistence wage and no normal adult male covered by an award is permitted to work a full standard hours week at less than the assessed basic wage rate. A subsidiary argument is raised on the basis of r.

The very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from I assuming a guardianship of the public mind through regulating the press, speech, and religion. The Industrial Tribunal, Bombay(1) and the following observations of Mahajan, J. There is evidence neither in support of one, nor of the other. " Non-interference by the State with this right was emphasized in Thomas v. After reviewing all these various authorities Venkatarama Aiyar, J.

It was conceded before the appellate tribunal that a pen-down strike falls within this definition, and this position is not seriously disputed before us either. There are however variations of that concept and a distinction has been drawn, for instance, in Australian industrial terminology between the basic wage and the minimum wage. The basic wage is expressed as the minimum at which normal adult male unskilled workers may legally be employed, differing from the amounts fixed as legal minima for skilled and semi- skilled workers, piece workers and casual workers respectively.

Section 9(1) of the Act, properly construed, made it incum- bent on the Wage Board to take into consideration the capacity of the newspaper industry to pay the rates and scales of wages recommended by it and as there was nothing to indicate that it bad done so, its decision was void and inoperative. 197, Criminal Procter Code. " In this view of the law we have to decide whether sanction was necessary or not and it is a matter for investigation as to whether an Army officer situated as Henderson was so removable even if there was evidence to show that he was attached to the Indian Army.

" This court has characterized the freedom of speech and that of the press as fundamental personal rights and liberties. If they do, then sanction is requisite. (as he then was) at p. It stresses, as do many opinions of this court, the importance of preventing the restriction of enjoyment of these liberties. It reflects the belief of the framers of the Constitution that exercise of the rights lies at the foundation of free government by free press.

The question is the true scope and effect of the definition clause in s. State of West Bengal (1) and Shree Kanthiah Ramayya Munipalli v. " Shall be for ever held by the said Jadulal Mullick, his heirs, executors, administrators and representatives to and for the use of the said Thakur Radha Shamsunderji to the intent that the said Thakur may be located and worshipped in the said premises and to and for no other use or intent whatsoever provided always that if at any time hereafter it shall appear expedient to the said Jadulal Mullick, his heirs, executors, administrators or representatives so to do it shall be lawful for him or them upon his or their providing and dedicating for the location and worship of the said Thakur another suitable Thakur Bari of the same or greater value than the premises hereby dedicated to revoke the trusts hereinbefore contained and it is hereby declared that unless and until another Thakur Bari is provided and dedicated as aforesaid the said Thakur shall not on any account be removed from the said premises and in the event of another Thakur Bari being provided and dedicated as aforesaid the said Thakur shall be located therein, but shall not similarly be removed therefrom on any account whatsoever.

The question has arisen in the following circumstances. -This appeal by special leave raises a question of some nicety and of considerable importance in the matter of industrial relations in this country. " The Privy Council analysed this provision, and stated that the last condition made the idol immovable, except upon providing for the dedicatee another Thakur Bari of the same or larger value. 2 (k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

The phrase is not an empty one and was not lightly used. Secondly, it will have to be decided oil evidence that the act complained of against Henderson, that is, verifying the claim of the appellant which is the basis for the allegation of abetment of the offence of cheating is directly concerned with his official duties or it was done in the discharge of his official duties and was so integrally connected with and attached to his office as to be inseparable from them.

448:- " But it cannot be the duty, because it is not the right, of the State to protect the public against false doctrine. 484 matters of this kind arising out of industrial disputes was considered by the Federal Court in Western India 'Automobile Association v.
Back to posts
This post has no comments - be the first one!

UNDER MAINTENANCE