The appellant was tried on a charge of murder by the Sessions judge with the aid of a jury. that would be allowed to contractors/developers, as per the requirements of Section 42 of the Act. An appeal to the High Supreme Court of India Lawyer was dismissed as that Court found no misdirections in the charge to the jury. 953, that the approver's evidence had to satisfy a double test i. The name given to the payment is, however, not material and it is the nature of the payment that has to be looked into. Willesden justices, Ex Parte Utley, (1948) 1 K.

(3) as formulated by learned counsel for the appellants ignores the distinction altogether and equates 'any person' with any employee'-past, 1173 present or future: this we do not think is quite correct or consistent with the other provisions of the Act. We think that Chagla C. The question of the purchase of works of companies by municipality is also considered by Dillon: " Where a municipal corporation has granted a franchise to a water or gas company to construct its plant, to use the city streets for pipes and mains, and to furnish water or light to the city and its inhabitants, it has been held that the legislature under special constitutional restrictions was without authority to compel the city to purchase the property or plant of the company if it desired to acquire or construct works of its own; but in the absence of constitutional limitations statutes may be enacted and contracts made which in their effect prevent municipalities from establishing water works of their own until they have at least offered to purchase the works of corporations organised and existing within their limits " (3).

But till the gap is completely obliterated, there is a distinction between workmen and non-workmen and that distinction has an important bearing on the question before us. The foregoing provisions, so far relevent to the present enquiry, may be summarised thus: If a candidate has been dismissed from Government service and a period of five years has not elapsed since dismissal-, he will have to file along with the nomination paper a certificate issued in the prescribed manner by the Election Commission to the effect that he has not been dismissed for corruption or disloyalty to the State.

Wednesbury Corporation, [1947] EWCA Civ 1; (1948) 1 K. The Union of India (UOI), through the MoPNG, issued a Notice Inviting Tenders in August 1992 (1992 NIT), along with a Model Production Sharing Contract (MPSC), for Development of Oil and Gas Fields from various companies in relation to some selected oil fields in Gujarat and other States. Associated Provincial Picture Houses, Ltd. The Returning Officer may improperly accept a nomination paper though it discloses the said defect and though an objection is raised to its reception on that ground.

Article 16 of the above-mentioned MPSC contained a specific provision, which provided certain financial benefits and deductions in relation to taxes etc. The supervisory staff did not come within the definition. The appellant contended that there was misdirection in the charge to the jury in that the jury was not told, as laid down in Sarwan Singh v. The State of West Bengal (1) a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court held that s.

Following this judgment a Division Bench of that Court (Trevor Harries, C. If the nomination paper does not disclose any such defect and if the 296 Returning Officer has no knowledge of that fact, he has no option but to accept the nomination. The expression 'any person' Advocates in Supreme Court of India the definition clause means, in our opinion, a person in whose employment, or non-employment, or terms of employment, or conditions of labour the workmen as a class have a direct or substantial interest-with whom they have, under the scheme of the Act, a community of interest.

Though the word " gratuity " has been used to cover all these three cases, it is clear that cases of retrench- ment as such are also covered by the Award and payment to workmen retrenched has been called "gratuity". Now, under this Award, it is obvious that this payment on retrenchment though called gratuity is really nothing more nor less than compensation on account of retrenchment. Limitation (4) formulated by learned counsel for the appellants is also too generally stated.

397, Veerappa Pillai v. 100(1)(d)(iv) permits an attack on the ground, among others, of non-compliance with the provisions of the Act. The evidence against him consisted of the testimony of an approver and the proof of corroborative circumstances tending to connect him with the crime. We venture to think that the answer must be in the negative. Can it be said that workmen as a class are directly or substantially interested in the employment, non- employment, terms of employment or conditions of lab our of persons who belong to the supervisory staff and are, under the provisions of the Act, non-workmen on whom the Act has conferred no benefit, who cannot by themselves be parties to an industrial dispute and for whose representation the Act makes no particular provision ?

We recognise that solidarity of labour or general interest of tabour welfare may furnish, in some cases, the necessary nexus of direct or substantial interest in a dispute between employers and workmen, but the principle of solidarity of the labour movement or general welfare of labour must be based on or correlated to the principle of community of interest; the workmen can raise a dispute in respect of those persons only in the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or the conditions or labour of whom they have a direct or substantial interest.

The Act avowedly gives a restricted meaning to the word I workman' and almost all the provisions of the Act are intended to confer benefits on that class of persons who generally answer to the description of workmen. The learned author also says that " If a municipality stipulates in a contract with a water or other public service company that it shall have the- right to purchase the works of the company at a time and in a (1) Dillon's "Municipal Corporations", 5th Ed.

Our reason for so holding is not merely that the Act makes a distinction between workmen and non-workmen, but because a dispute to be a real dispute must be one in which the parties to the dispute have a direct or substantial interest. The gap has been reduced to some extent by the amendments of 1956; part of the supervisory staff (who draw wages not exceeding five hundred rupees per mensem) and those who were otherwise workmen but were discharged or dismissed earlier have also come within the definition.

If it has not been done, the Returning Officer, either suo motu or on objections raised by the opposite party, has to reject the nomination. The State of Punjab, [1957] INSC 34; [1957] S. but all employees were not workmen. Section 100(1)(d)(i) of the Act deals with improper acceptance of any nomination and s. , correctly put the crucial test when he said in Narendra Kumar Sen v. , he must be a reliable witness and his evidence must receive sufficient corroboration and in that the corroborating evidence was not sufficient to connect the appellant with the crime.

If and when the gap is completely bridged, I workmen will be synonymous with 'employees', whether engaged Law firms in Supreme Court any skilled or unskilled manual, supervisory, technical or clerical work, etc. The jury found the appellant guilty and the Sessions judge accepting the verdict sentenced him to imprisonment for life. 4(1) of the Act was ultra vires.