LawforAll

▼
Showing posts with label labour laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label labour laws. Show all posts
Thursday, February 9, 2012

Building Labour problems – contempt of court =most of the states have not complied with the directions issued by this Court. They had failed to discharge their statutory duties under the provisions of the Building & Other Construction Worker (Regulations of Employment & Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 (for short, `the Act’) and the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (for short `the Cess Act’), thus, they should be punished for violating the orders of this Court. = audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has not been conducted of the funds placed at the disposal of the concerned authority. We may also notice that large funds are lying with the said Welfare Boards/authorities, but have not been disbursed. The possibility of these amounts being diverted by the state authority for other heads of expenditure in the respective states/union territories cannot be ruled out. Resultantly, while reiterating our earlier orders, we also issue the following directions for their immediate compliance: a) All the State Welfare Boards shall be subjected to audit by the CAG within two months from today. All the States, Union Territories and the State Boards to initiate the process and ensure its completion under the provisions of Section 27 of the Act. [8]

›
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.6 ...
Tuesday, September 20, 2011

"8.As found by the Labour Court, they are attempting to evade from honouring the earlier Award, which has become final and that computation petitions as against the Award were also concluded and revenue recovery certificate was filed. As rightly contended by Mr.G.B.Saravanabhavan, the learned counsel for the contesting respondents, the attempt by the management is only to protract the litigation. It is not out of place to note that not even a single paisa has been paid to the workmen despite there being so many orders in their favour. Therefore, the writ petitions are misconceived and bereft of reasons."

›
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16 / 09 / 2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.NO.6382 OF 2...

The Supreme Court has clearly held that after the introduction of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act with effect from 15.12.1971, the Labour Court has the power of an Appellate Court and it can also re-appreciate the evidence and come to different conclusion if the situation so warrants. The earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited and another v. Workmen, AIR 1958 SC 130 was specifically held to be not holding the field in view of the introduction of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The scope of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act came to be explained by the Supreme Court in Workmen of Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. v. Management, [1973] 1 SCC 813 : 1973 I LLJ 278. The Supreme Court in the said judgment has observed as follows: ".. The words

›
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS   DATED:    15.9.2011 CORAM:   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.21625 of 2009 ...
Friday, September 2, 2011

In order to avoid their liability under various labour statutes employers are very often resorting to subterfuge by trying to show that their employees are, in fact, the employees of a contractor. It is high time that this subterfuge must come to an end.

›
                                                                            REPORTABLE                            IN THE SUPREME COURT ...