LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Anonymous   19 April 2011 at 15:26

Coal Mines Provident Fund Act.

Dear Sir,
My father was employee In S.E.C.L.
He passed away in year 2008. As per his Nomination the PF amount was distributed among Three person namely His wife , His Father , & His mother. Out of these three person my Grandfather was already expired in year in year 1985, so part of his nomination Fund is still pending from last three year. on being requested for several time to concerned authority , the pending amount was distributed among my unmarried sister & my mother equally however , Since 6 month from this decision the PF amount has not been disbursed to my mother & my sister yet. Kindly assist me how to get this Pending amount in earliest manner & can we claim interest on it.

Anonymous   18 April 2011 at 19:14

plea bargaining

does plea bargaining realy helps the accused as well as d court in disposal of a case in d
shortest time or it just allures an accused?

Ashok. B.V.   16 April 2011 at 16:43

occupier

hi

the answer to your query is as follows;

The proviso to section 2(n) is added by amendment Act 20 of 1987. The proviso (ii) states that "in case of a company, any one of the directors, shall be deemed to be the occupier;" Thus in Bharia Metal Containers Pvt. Ltd. V. State of UP 1990 (77) FJR 93, it was held the section 2(n) does not permit a company to nominate anybody else for the purposes of the Act other than one of the Directors of the company"
However, in 1994 II C. L. R. 312, 1992 II CLR 575 stated that any person other than a director can be occupier within the meaning of section 2(n).
Ultimately, the supreme Court in the case of J. K. Industries Ltd. V. Chief Inspector of Factories and Boilers reported in 1996 (6) SCC 665
The basic question was whether in the case of a company which owns or runs the factory, is it only a director of the company who can be notified as the occupier of the factory within the meaning of provisio (ii) to section 2 (n) of the Act, or whether the company can nominate any other employee to be the occupier by passing a resolution to the effect that the said employee shall have ultimate control over the affairs of the factory. The Supreme Court approved of the former proposition. Thus as per this judgement no person other than one of the directors can be occupier under the meaning of section 2(n) (ii).

PBS KUMAR   16 April 2011 at 16:01

WHO IS AN OCCUPIER AS PER THE FACTORIES ACT,1947

Dear Experts,

I am in grate confussion. Who is an "OCCUPIER" as per Factories Act, 1947 ? The contravension is only Board of Director nominee has been appointed as Occupier or only any one of the Board of Director has nominated as Occupier ?

Your response is most urgent, if any provide with case law or any G.O. may please supply.

Regards,

PBS KUMAR

shuvendu satpathy   16 April 2011 at 08:20

suspension revokation

please give an reply at an early date

Anonymous   14 April 2011 at 18:18

regarding pay protection toex serviceman after reemployment

sir,
i am ex sgt samit kumar bhol retired from iaf from oct 2009.i got reemployment in india post as a postal assistant.i want to know i am eligible for pay protection or not from postal service.central govt is giving pay protection to ex seviceman after reemployment?pl give me answer

Dheeraj   13 April 2011 at 15:16

How can I get the particulars of an Army Officer his posting etc.

Dear Friends,

Can anybody suggest me as to how an Army officer can be traced out in India. Background is , a person A is having a peng criminal case case under section 27 Arms Act, the charges are framed against him. He never appeared before the trail court after bail. Prosecution has not conducted its evidence and has been taking dates. Now A is living an anonymous life. I had filed RTI appication to the Armed Forces HQ and to the concerned Naval PIOby mentioning the roll No. of the Written Exam os the CDSE exam. Under RTI the concerned authority has declined to furnish his particulars on the basis of bing the same third party information under section 11 RTI. However the public intetrest in the information sought overweighs the individual interest in that case even personal information can also be disclosed. Teh public interest is that national security especially when a criminal background person has become a naval officer. Kindly sugegst m,e a way out.

Dheeraj

Anonymous   11 April 2011 at 10:34

recruitment of person with disabilities as per pwd act in india

Respected sir,
I have passed the written test held by one of public sector undertaking in india and called for interview but my selection was not done even the post is identified & reserved for the hearing imparement due to the reason that selection committee was not found me fit.
I want to ask you that is there any procedure to decide someone fit or unfit during interview. Or selection committee has the right to decide the fitness of the candidate merely on the performance in the interview only.

DINESH NAGWANI   09 April 2011 at 11:05

PROTECTION TO RESERVE CANDIDATE IN SURPLUS

RESPECTED EXPERTS,
MY FRIEND IS WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN AIDED COLLEGE IN AMRAVATI. AS COLLEGE IS FACING SURPLUS PROFESSOR

IN THAT CASE WHETHER MY FRIEND WILL GET PROTECTION AS HE IS IN PROBATION PERIOD & BELONGS TO RESERVED CATEGORY(VJNT). HIS POST FILLED ACCOURDING TO THE ROSTER. THERE ARE TWO POST RESERVES FOR THAT CATEGORY. ONE IS FILLED BY APPOINTING HIM AND THE SECOND POST IS YET VACENT. THIS TWO POST WAS VACENT SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COLLEGE. DUE TO NON AVAILABILITY OF THE CANDIDATE HE JOINED IN JULY 2010
PLS NOTIFY ANY NOTIFICATION, G.R., OR JUDICIAL RULINGS IN REFERANCE TO THAT

THANKING YOU

JAGJIT   07 April 2011 at 07:24

R N BHATT VS. LIC OF INDIA

Dear Sir/ Madam,

I am a Law student and presently working with LIC OF INDIA, and also the officer bearer of LIC EMP. WELFARE ASSN.

I am searching a case as cited above I do not know the exact citation of the same, but I can brief you the case - the plaintiff in the above said case was in the cadre of HIGHER GRADE ASSISTANT for a quite long time, we was not due promotions in time and after the case went into the HIGH COURT it was settled that the plaintiff must get his due promotions and accordingly LIC was directed by the HON'BLE HIGH COURT THAT THE PLAINTIFF MUST BE DIRECTLY PROMOTED TO A.O. CADRE. LIC WENT INTO APPEAL before the HON'BLE SC WHICH ULTIMATELY UPHELD THE ORDERS OF THE HIGH COURT. IT IS A LANDMARK CASE AS FAR AS PROMOTIONS IN THE SERVICES ARE CONCERNED WHERE EMPLOYER DUE TO FAILURE IN ITS SYSTEM STOPS ANY EMPLOYEE TO GROW AND DEVELOP AND GET DUE PROMOTIONS IN TIME.

I as a welfare association representative and as a law student request to your goodself to provide me the exact citation of the said case.

We shall be highly grateful to you.


Regards,

JAGJIT KUMAR JAGOAR
Mob- 9953320041.