Search Results for "employer's mistake"

181 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 181 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Against Industrial Court Order in Unfair Labour Practice Case — Limitation Period for Filing Complaint Under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 Is Not Barred by Delay When Cause of Action Is Continuing.

The judgment involves two writ petitions arising from an order of the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, in Revision ULP No.70/2015. The petitioner in WP 1...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Upholds CAT Order Directing Appointment of Candidates Who Suppressed Criminal Cases in Application Form — Suppression of Criminal Case Not Material When Case Ended in Acquittal and Candidates Were Otherwise Eligible.

The Union of India and other petitioners challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 7th August 2014, which directed them ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Reduction of Pension and Recovery of Excess Payment. Employer's Order Reducing Pay Fixed at Retirement and Recovering Excess Amount Set Aside as Violative of Principles of Natural Justice and Unreasonable.

The petitioner, Vijay Sambrao Bharati, a retired employee of Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, challenged an order of his employer that reduced the pay ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition by Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Challenging Reinstatement Order. Employer-Employee Relationship Established Despite Contractor System, Termination Held Unfair Labour Practice Under MRTU & PULP Act.

The petitioner, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, challenged the order of the Industrial Court dated 17/9/1999, which reversed the Labou...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of ESI Contributions Paid Under Mistake of Law — Employer Entitled to Restitution Under Section 72 of Indian Contract Act. Mistake of Law Does Not Bar Claim for Refund Under Section 75 of ESI Act, 1948.

The petitioners, M/s. Indian Hotels Co. Limited (owner of Taj Mahal Hotel and Taj Intercontinental) and its shareholder, filed a writ petition seeking...