BAYAPU REDDY
13 July 2011 at 14:47
IS IT MANDATORY TO IMPLEMENT PAY SCALES AT PAR WITH GOVT FOR TEACHING AS WELL AS NON TEACHING STAFF. ANY COURT JUDGEMENTS
N.J. MISHRA
13 July 2011 at 12:08
please member kinldy guide me in my below mentioned query
whether ESI inspector has right to comment on Employees Provident Fund registration or rules or can examine the same?
rajesh
13 July 2011 at 11:36
sir,
i am working in a central govt department in a gazetted officer rank, at ahmedabad. my spouse has been transferred on promotion to bangalore last year. An OM issued by DPT states that the cadre controlling authority should post the employee to the same station of posting of his or her spouse if post is available. Contrary to this, if i apply for a transfer to bangalore on personal grounds, my department wants me to give an undertaking or a mention in the request that i shall be willing to join a lower post (a direct fall from the grade pay 5400 to 4200) to consider my transfer, though they will protect my pay in the pay band. I was wondering how this is justified when on one hand Govt wants husband and wife serving in the same department to remain in the same station, and on the other hand the department is following the rules stipulated for transfer on personal grounds? Moreover, i feel depressed and demotivated since `grade pay' is the deciding factor (post 6th PC) for allowing almost every benefit to CG servants, downgrading to a non-gazetted post that too reducing to a grade pay two levels lower does not make sense. Anybody can advise me how to go ahead with my transfer request please???
skg
12 July 2011 at 22:24
In court case if a party produce a telephone recording as an evidence and the opposite party object the genuineness of this recording then what criteria court adopts in finalizing its genuiness. Also who has the first onus to prove either party or the opposite party and how it can be proved.
rgd
skg
skg
12 July 2011 at 22:14
During pendency of an ongoing labour case of illegal termination with cross examination of worker evidence is still
due,can a worker file an application u/s 33 C(2) for recovery of some dues which management says that workman is not
entitled whereas the workman has produced in its evidence the employee welfare policies where this due was pre existing for his level of employees and since they have received so he is also entitled.
If he is entitled what is the procedure to file application u/s 33 C (2) and whether he can file this application without the help of lawyer since lawyer is saying that we can file this application only after cross examination stage when the management is not able to prove our evidence of this due. Is he right?
Which is the form for this application and from where on internet this application form can be obtained.
rgds
skg
skg
12 July 2011 at 18:17
In an ongoing labour case a writ petition under 226 against interim order of a labour case was filed by management which was dismissed by high court on the grounds that writ petition against only awards are feasible and not on interim orders.
The High court also directed the lower court to decide the labour case which is at the stage of cross examnation of worker within six month and also give a date to dispose the case.
My question to experts is that can management still adopt delay tactics to lengthen the case beyond this date or whether lower courts have power to stretch the case ignoring High court order.
Also cite some Apex court cases if they exist in support or not in support of this direction.
skg
raghavendra
12 July 2011 at 18:00
sir,
how to calculate the leave encashment , is there any differance between calculating leave encashment /vacation encashment and gratuity
N.J. MISHRA
12 July 2011 at 16:08
DEAR MEMEBER KINLDY SUGGEST AND GUIDE ME IN MY QUERIES: -
RECENTLY INSURANCE INSPECTOR VISITED OUT ORGANISATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF COVERAGE OF ESTABLISHMENT UNDER ESI ACT, 1948 AND FURTHER REQUESTED TO KEEP THE FOLLOWING RECORDS FOR VERIFICATION: -
1. FACTORY LICENCE
2. TRADE LICENCE
3. CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION UNDER PROFESSIONAL TAX AND RETURN / CHALLAN
4. REGISTRATION LETTER UNDER EPF ACT
5. REGISTRATION LETTER UNDER PROFESSIONAL TAX AND RETURN / CHALLAN
6. BOOK STATEMENT
7. VOTER'S ID OF THE PARTNERS / OWNERS
8. PARTNERSHIP DEED / MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLE OF ASSOCIATION
9. ELECTRICITY BILLS
10. ATTENDENCE REGISTER
11. WAGES AND SALARY REGISTER
12. ATTENDENCE AND WAGES REGISTER FOR CONTRACTOR'S LABOUR AND CASUAL WORKERS
13. CASH BOOK AND LEDGER
14. BALANCE SHEET
MY QUERY IS WHETHER INSURANCE INSPECTOR CAN CONDUCT INSPECTION OF THE AFORESAID AND WHETHER HE IS HAVING ANY RIGHTS TO VISIT ANY ESTABLSIHMENT FOR THE VERIFICATION OF THE AFORESAID. KINLDY GUIDE ME.
Rama mohan Acharya
12 July 2011 at 14:05
In a Central PSU, multiple union s are in there. Only one Union has been recognised as per the code of Discipline formulated by the Govt. Other Unions are registered with the Registrar of Trade Union. Their membership number is not known to the Employer. One of the registered Union approached the RLC(C)raising an Industrial Dispute with some demands submitted to the Management. One of the Demand is to ascertain the majority Union through Secret Bllot System. RLC(C) considered the ID and started Conciliation Proceedings. Mean while, two registered Unions (the union which raised ID and another) approached the management for declaring their Office bearers as Protected workmen. The managemet replied that as the membership is not known and the same matter is pending before RLC(C) in conciliation, no action can be taken. Both the Unions approached RLC(C) by raising separate Industrial Disputes. RLC sent notice to the management for discussion.
My querry is Can a Union raise a dispute on the subject of declaration of Protected workmen? can RLC is justified to take cognizance of the letter of Unions and asking management to participate in the discussion?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Terminated from Employement
I had been Terminated from my employment after 16 yrs. of my service. The employer had not given any prior notice of termination. The termination has been due to the fact that we 16 staff employees had taken the cause of raise of salary and Union activity under the leadership of Mr. Rajan Raje. The case is still been carried in the office of Labour Commissioner office. They give us Taareekh pe Tareekh. Please advice us how to fight this legal battle very fast.