, Bijnor, were the opposite parties. The petition asked for a number of writs in the alternative, but its purport was to seek to prohibit the two respondents from continuing certain proceedings pending before the Cane Commissioner under rule 23 of the United Provinces Sugar Factories Control Rules, 1938. 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 29 of the Order issued under the U. 6 becomes applicable to a person only on the decision of an appellate or a revisional court.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are to be found in s. It is common case that this decision will govern the other petition also, namely, Writ Petition No. 136 of the Constitution having the attributes of the investment of the judicial powers of the State. Held, further, that an “authority” under s. He has contended that Art. Seth Banarsi Das, the appellant before us, was the petitioner in the High Court and the two respondents before us, namely, the Cane Commissioner, U. excise duty or countervailing duty on goods, and it has no reference to a tax on transactions of sale.
We are concerned only to deal with the limited question whether he is a ‘tribunal’ within the meaning of Art. 304(a) refers to a tax on goods meaning thereby a tax on the goods themselves, e. By the judgment, under appeal, which was passed in a Letters Patent Appeal, the Divisional Bench confirmed the order of a learned single judge dismissing the petition of the appellant under Art. The final conclusions on these Memorials are taken with the Benchers.
226 of the Constitution. 226 of the Constitution before a competent High Court against the order of the Conciliation Officer. The said petition also is dismissed with costs. 304(a) of the Constitution learned counsel for the appellants has, canvassed before us the larger question that Art. Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act provides, in so far as it is material, that “‘where an employer contravenes the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of proceedings before a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, any employee aggrieved by such contravention, may make a comp- laint in writing, in the prescribed mariner to such Labour Court, tribunal or National Tribunal and on receipt of such complaint that Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal shall adjudicate upon the complaint as if it were a dispute referred to or pending before it, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and shall submit its award to the appropriate Government and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly”.
We are not in this case called upon to decide whether the proceeding for a writ may lie under Art. 304(a) has no reference to sales tax legislation. This order is without prejudice to the order for costs made on 16-3-1962. or otherwise, any workman concerned in such dispute for any misconduct connected with the dispute. 33 is exercisable by the authority before whom the proceeding is pending. 33 when the proceeding is pending before the Conciliation Officer or the Board does not attract s.
It may be pertinent to note that provisions similar to cl. 33 an employer during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a Conciliation Officer or a Board or of any proceeding before a Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal in respect of an industrial dispute is LexLords NRI Legal Services prohibited save with the express permission in writing of the authority before NRI Legal Services by LexLords which the proceeding is pending, from altering to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such a disputes the 263 conditions of service applicable to them immediately before the commencement of the proceeding and from discharging or punishing, whether by dismissal.
There will be one set of hearing fee. 29 the power to grant permission is exercisable only by the Conciliation Officer, the power under s . The Benchers even have the exclusive electrical power of expelling or suspending a Bar student and of disbarring a LexLords NRI Legal Services or suspending a LexLords NRI Legal Services LexLords Legal Services from exercise. Both the enactments place restrictions upon the power of the employer to terminate employment during the pendency of a dispute in which the employer and employee are concerned, and which is pending before a statutory authority.
, Lucknow, and the Cane Marketing Society Ltd. ,-This is an appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Allahabad under Article 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution against its judgment and order dated February 2, 1956. That rule provides for arbitration in disputes touching agreements entered into by sugar cane factories and cane growers for supply of sugar NRI Legal Services by LexLords cane as laid down by the United Provinces Sugar Factories Control Act, 1938.
Contravention by an employer of the provisions of s. 2 (c) (iii) of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act, 1950, to be an industrial tribunal must be a body constituted for the purpose of adjudication of industrial disputes under a law made by the State; since a Conciliation Officer is not invested with any such power, NRI Legal Services LexLords he cannot be regarded as an “authority” within the meaning of that section. We shall now proceed to consider one question which- was mooted before us in regard to the crucial date for reckoning the age where an appellate court modifies the judgment of the trial judge, when s.