Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Industrial Disputes Act

6 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD AND ORS.versusCHHOTA BIRSA URANW

[2014] 4 S.C.R. 88725 March 2014Dismissed

The employee, Chhota Birsa Uranw, joined Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. in 1973 with a date of birth recorded as 15‑Feb‑1947. He later discovered that his school leaving certificate and Mining Sardarship certificate recorded his birth as 6‑Feb‑1950 and sought correction under Implementation Instruction No. 76 in 1987. The emp

ST. MARY’S EDUCATION SOCIETY & ANR.versusRAJENDRA PRASAD BHARGAVA & ORS.

2022 INSC 85624 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The private unaided minority school St. Mary's Education Society terminated the services of its non‑teaching employee, Rajendra Prasad Bhargava, after a disciplinary enquiry. Bhargava filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to set aside the termination and the disciplinary committee's order.

GOWRAMMA C (DEAD) BY LRSversusMANAGER (PERSONNEL) HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICAL LTD. & ANR.

2022 INSC 22623 February 2022Case Partly allowed

Gowramma C, a staff nurse employed by Hindustan Aeronautical Ltd., was dismissed after a Tahasildar declared her caste certificate false, leading to loss of employment. The High Court initially upheld the dismissal, but a Division Bench later held the Tahasildar incompetent and directed verification by the Bangalore Di

TRANSPORT & DOCK WORKERS UNION AND ORS.versusMUMBAI PORT TRUST AND. ANR.

2010 INSC 78015 November 2010Dismissed

The Transport & Dock Workers Union and two typist‑cum‑computer clerks challenged the Mumbai Port Trust’s policy of fixing longer daily working hours for clerks appointed after 1‑Nov‑1996, alleging discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Trust argued that the differential hours were necessary

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusRAGHUWAR PAL SINGH

2018 INSC 23413 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was appointed as Veterinary Compounder in the Central Cattle Breeding Farms in 1999 by the then Director In‑charge without obtaining prior written approval of the competent authority as required by the Central Cattle Breeding Farms (Class III and IV) Recruitment Rules, 1969. The Department later issued a

KIRLOSKAR BROTHERS LIMITEDversusRAMCHARAN AND ORS

2022 INSC 12555 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Kirloskar Brothers Ltd., the principal employer, appealed against orders that reinstated six contract labourers (Ramcharan & others) and directed Kirloskar to absorb them as employees. The labour contract with the contractor (respondent No.7) had ended and the contractor dismissed the workers. The Supreme Court examine

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search