|
Legislative and Regulatory Update
|
You now have the option
of customizing your manupatra round-up
.This means
that you get updates on the areas of interest that you select .You may
change your preferences at any time you wish to. If you do not customize
your round up you will continue to get the updates on all areas
To
customize your round-up now click here.
_____________________________________________________________________ |
|
India Centric
Online Legal & Business DatabaseBringing forth new efficiency and
unparalleled results to research
efforts. |
| In This Issue |
|
[No.79]
March 10, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
To
keep you informed about the latest Legislative and Regulatory
information manupatra.com
publishes this e-roundup highlighting the recent changes brought
about by the Notifications/Acts/Bills /Ordinances etc.
About
manupatra.com
../
provides comprehensive and easy to use legal and related
information over the Internet .Our database covers Central
Laws , Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court (full
text of the judgments from 1950 onwards ), Orders of
Tribunals , Bills , Notifications, Circulars and
more
Key
features of manupatra are
 |
Content
is derived from reliable primary and secondary
sources |
|
Database
is updated on a daily basis |
|
Electronic
Ready Reckoner to view the judgments under a particular section of
an Act / Subject |
|
Powerful
search engine with user friendly
interfaces |
|
Search
in any one court/year or multiple
courts/year |
|
Hyper-linking
of documents |
|
Updated
modules on WTO, Anti Dumping, Arbitration, Investment Destinations
Abroad, Capital Markets, Taxation, Environment, Cyber & IT
Laws, IPR, Corporate Laws, Industrial Policies, Foreign Trade,
Forex & Banking and more
|
For
subscription to manupatra.com or for more details please log onto ../
or call us at 0120 2531811 or send an email to : contact@manupatra.com
If
at any stage you wish to stop receiving the e-roundup
please click here to unsubscribe.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
International Cases
and News
|
|
Cases
Source:
Westlawinternational.com
The Supreme Court has held that
the working owner of a business qualifies as a "participant" in an
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) plan if the plan covers one or
more employees other than the business owner and his or her spouse. In so
holding, the Supreme Court rejected the Sixth Circuit's conclusion that a
business owner could rank only as an "employer" and not also as an
"employee" for purposes of ERISA-sheltered plan participation.
Raymond B. Yates, M.D., P.C.
Profit Sharing Plan v. Hendon
A district court has held as a
matter of first impression that due process required an immigration judge (IJ)
to advise an alien facing removal based on a state-court conviction for an
aggravated felony of the opportunity to apply for relief from the order for
removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act or the Convention Against
Torture. The alien had a strong interest in remaining in the United States,
since he had lived in the U.S. for more than 20 years, and had a common-law wife
and three children who were U.S. citizens. Moreover, the failure to advise the
alien increased the risk of erroneous deprivation. Finally, requiring the IJ to
do so did not significantly burden the government's interest in administrative
efficiency.
Bonhometre v. Ashcroft
Even applying the strict
scrutiny test to a church-affiliated employer's constitutional challenge to
provisions of the Women's Contraception Equity Act (WCEA), which required
employers who provided group health care and disability insurance prescription
coverage for their employees to include coverage for prescription
contraceptives, the Supreme Court held that the WCEA did not offend the right to
free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the state and federal free exercise
clauses. The Court noted that whether the strict scrutiny or rational basis test
is the proper standard of review for challenges to neutral, generally applicable
laws under the state constitution's free exercise clause was an open question.
Catholic Charities Of
Sacramento, Inc. v. Superior Court
Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR) Cases
-
Copyright: No infringement of
copyright when a single copy of a reported decision, case summary, statute,
regulation or limited selection of text from a treatise is made available.
The appellant Law Society
maintained and operated the Great Library at Osgoode Hall in Toronto, a
reference and research library with one of the largest collections of legal
materials in Canada, providing a request-based photocopy service for Law Society
members, the judiciary and other authorized researchers. Under this "custom
photocopy service", legal materials are reproduced by Great Library staff
and delivered in person, by mail or by facsimile transmission to requesters. The
respondent publishers commenced copyright infringement actions against the Law
Society, seeking a declaration of subsistence and ownership of copyright in
specific works and a declaration that the Law Society had infringed copyright
when the Great Library reproduced a copy of each of the works. Held The Law
Society does not infringe copyright when a single copy of a reported decision,
case summary, statute, regulation or limited selection of text from a treatise
is made by the Great Library in accordance with its access policy.
CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law
Society of Upper Canada
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of
Grosse in the suit alleging that Grosse violated the Anticybersquatting Consumer
Protection Act ("ACPA") by registering the domain name "lucasnursery.com"
and creating a website which detailed Grosse's complaints against Lucas for the
allegedly bad landscaping services.The 6th Circuit affirmed the grant of summary
judgment in favor of Grosse concluding that Grosse did not act in bad faith
within the meaning of the ACPA given that the site was used for noncommercial
purposes and Grosse's actions did not evince an intent to trade on the goodwill
of Lucas's mark hence the paradigmatic harm that the ACPA was enacted to
eradicate was not present in any of Grosse's actions. Grosse's conduct was found
not to be motivated by bad faith or intent to profit. It was noted that Grosse's
actions were undertaken in the spirit of informing fellow consumers about the
practices of a landscaping company that she believed had performed inferior work
on her yard and such actions are inconsistent with the ACPA's purposes.
Lucas Nursery & Landscaping v. Grosse
- Trademarks: Political candidate could
not eliminate critic's website.
A political candidate was not likely to prevail
on a cybersquatting claim against a critic whose website used the candidate's
name as a domain name. Thus, the candidate was not entitled to a temporary
restraining order. The anti- cybersquatting statute did not provide coverage for
a personal name that was not trademarked, where the website had no commercial
use, and, in any event, the suit's implication of the critic's free speech
rights was an overriding issue.
Ficker v. Tuohy
- Patents: Patent term extension applied to all
salts of molecule covered by drug patent.
The patent term extension, granted to a
pharmaceutical company to compensate for the regulatory review period for a new
drug based on the patented molecule, applied to all the salts of the molecule
covered by the patent, and not merely to the particular salt of the molecule
being used in the approved drug. Thus, a generic drug manufacturer could not
avoid infringement during the extension term merely by changing the salt.
Pfizer Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Ltd.
- Computers and Electronics: Patent for
system for administering separate account life insurance policies was valid.
A reference to "surrender value protected
investment credits," in a patent for a computerized system for
administering separate account life insurance policies, did not render the
patent indefinite. Although the phrase was not expressly defined, it was
inferable that it was synonymous with the industry- understood "stable
value protected investment credits."
Bancorp Services, L.L.C. v. Hartford Life Ins.
Co.
Source:
wipo.int
The dispute in the present case pertains to the domain
name “yallapepsi.com” which is registered with IHoldings.com, Inc.
d/b/a DotRegistrar.com and its registrant is the respondent Samtech. The
Complainant PepsiCo is the owner of the PEPSI COLA and PEPSI trademarks along
with numerous other marks incorporating the word PEPSI in various countries,
including several registrations in Saudi Arabia, where respondent is located.
Regarding the issue of confusing similarity of disputed
name with PEPSI trademarks and rights or legitimate interests in the domain name
the panel decided in favor of complainant considering the notoriety of the PEPSI
mark, the fact that the mark forms the most distinctive part of the disputed
domain name and complainant’s pre existing rights in the PEPSI mark. In
addition, respondent’s choice to use a stylized "Pepsi" mark and a
logo similar to PepsiCo's logo on the corresponding website suggested that the
respondent was not making a legitimate, non-commercial use of the domain name,
srather was attempting to benefit from an association with complainant’s mark
thus the element of bad faith was also satisfied. For all the foregoing reasons,
the Panel ordered transfer of disputed domain name “yallapepsi.com” to the
complainant.
PepsiCo, Inc., v. Samtech
News
The
Washington State followed California, New York and Massachusetts as new
battlegrounds for the question of legalized same-sex marriages when a lawsuit
was filed in Seattle on behalf of six same-sex couples who were denied marriage
licenses. It has been voiced that as long as gay couples cannot marry, they are
not treated equally under the law. The case seeks full marriage for lesbian and
gay couples in Washington, nothing more and nothing less. On February 24,
President Bush endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict marriage
to two people of the opposite sex, but left open the possibility that States
could allow civil unions in view of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's
recent decision granting marriage rights to same-sex couples, and San Francisco
Mayor Gavin Newsom's decision recently to begin giving marriage licenses to gay
and lesbian couples.
The
Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from the Boy Scouts wherein officials
dropped the group from a list of charities that receive donations through a
state employee payroll deduction plan. The organization claims the action as
discriminatory because of its policy against hiring gays. The case revisited the
gay rights fight surrounding the high court's ruling four years ago that the Boy
Scouts have the right to ban openly homosexual scout leaders. This time, the
question was whether states may treat the Scouts differently than other
organizations because of that policy.
Unabomber
Theodore Kaczynski, the former mathematics prodigy turned anti-technology serial
bomber has no right to donate his writings to a university for research, a
federal judge has ruled. U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. ruled that
the government legally possesses the papers on behalf of the victims of
Kaczynski's bombs, and may keep the documents indefinitely. As part of a plea
agreement, Kaczynski admitted his role in the bombings and was sentenced to life
in prison without parole in 1998. He is serving his sentence at a high-security
prison in Colorado.
The
Supreme Court wrangled over whether to allow a lawsuit by an elderly Los Angeles
woman over $150 million worth of paintings stolen by the Nazis from her
relatives more than 65 years ago. Justices have been asked to let Maria Altmann
pursue her suit. The government of Austria, which has the art, is trying to
block the suit in a California court. The question for the court is whether to
allow lawsuits over disputes predating a 1952 U.S. government policy that
shielded some countries from lawsuits. Austria argues that it rightfully owns
the paintings as a member of Altmann's family gave the Klimt paintings to the
museum. Altmann's lawyers contend the will was invalid. A victory for the
88-year-old Altmann, critics warn, could lead to lawsuits in American courts
against galleries worldwide and would revive old allegations of government
misconduct.
Iraq's
US-appointed Governing Council has signed an interim constitution at a landmark
ceremony in Baghdad. Shia Muslim spiritual Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani - a leading
critic - says it will hamper plans for a permanent constitution in the future as
only an elected body should sign off further legislation in Iraq. But US
President George W Bush called the adoption an "historic milestone".
The document sets out the framework for how Iraq will be governed after the
US-led coalition ends the occupation on 30 June and before a new government is
chosen by national elections, supposedly by early 2005.
The
House of Lords has defeated government hopes of pushing through plans to abolish
the post of lord chancellor and set up a supreme court. Tory Lords leader Lord
Strathclyde said that any suggestion that the views of Commons and Lords on
scrutiny should now be bypassed by withdrawing this Bill and laying a new one
would be an act of petulance. Tories have urged ministers not to ignore
"the voice of Parliament" by using powers to force the bill through as
the same would be "the mark of a government unwilling to listen to the
voice of Parliament". The Bill seeks to establish a new independent
commission to appoint judges and the proposed reforms would leave that job to a
new supreme court working completely separately from Parliament.
The
Supreme Court ruled that while people pleading guilty to crimes are entitled to
an attorney, judges don't have to warn them of the disadvantages of not seeing a
lawyer. In its 9-0 ruling, the court reaffirmed that people facing prison time
are entitled to attorneys at critical stages of the process, including a plea
hearing. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said from the bench that the court has
not "prescribed any formula or script to be read to a defendant who states
that he elects to plead guilty without counsel.
Couples caught
kissing passionately in public in Indonesia could spend five years in jail or a
$29,000 fine. Members of parliament have proposed an anti-pornography bill that
includes a ban on kissing on the mouth in public. Anyone caught flashing would
face similar penalties. The bill also proposes bans on public nudity, erotic
dances and sex parties, with jail terms ranging from three to 10 years. Watching
such shows could lead to two years behind bars.
|
|
SEBI
|
|
Secondary
Market Division
Circular No. SEBI/MIRSD/MB/Cir-01/2004
Dated 08.03.2004 : In order to strengthen the disclosures as made in the Letter
of offer, certain additional disclosure requirements/modifications have been
carried out in the existing standard format of the Letter of Offer, which was
originally framed and issued on August 10, 1999. The Merchant Bankers have been
advised to follow the modified format while submitting draft letter of offers
from now onwards.
Circular No. SEBI/MRD/Policy/Cir-13/2004
Dated 03.03.2004 : Regulation 55A of SEBI (Depositories and Participants)
Regulations,1996 and SEBI Circular No. D&CC/FITTC/Cir-16/2002 dated 31.12.02
stipulates a mandatory condition on all the listed companies to submit audit
reports on quarterly basis within 30 days from the end of each quarter, to the
stock exchange(s) where the shares of a company are listed. Noticing the non
compliance of aforesaid provisions by the listed companies, SEBI has instructed
the stock exchange(s) to draw the attention of the listed companies to the
aforesaid provisions and the need for effective compliance with the said
provisions. Further, stock exchanges have been advised to inform the companies
that submission of the audit report is a continuous requirement and accordingly,
comply with the same on time. SEBi has also instructed the companies that
failure to comply with the aforesaid provisions would be viewed seriously and
penal actions including adjudication proceedings would be initiated by SEBI
against the companies.
In addition to above the Board
has also directed the exchange(s) to submit the status reports on the extent of
compliance with the audit requirement by the listed companies, within 45 days
from the end of each quarter, as advised earlier by SEBI vide letter dated
31.12.2002.
Mutual Funds
Division
Circular No. SEBI/ IMD/CIR No.
6/4213/ 04 Dated 01.03.2004 : With a view to strengthen the process of 'Know
your client' by mutual funds, SEBI has advised to ensure that wherever an
application by the investors of mutual funds is for a total value of Rs. 50,000
or more, the applicant or in the case of application in joint names, each of the
applicants, should mention his/her permanent account number (PAN) allotted under
the Income Tax Act, 1961 or where the same has not been allotted, the GIR number
and the income-tax Circle/Ward/District should be mentioned. In case where
neither the PAN nor the GIR number has been allotted, the fact of non-allotment
should be mentioned in the application form. It has been cleared that any
application form without these details should not be accepted by the mutual
fund.
|
|
Department of Company Affairs
|
|
Notification No. GSR131(E)
Dated 23.02.2004 : The Central Government has issued Companies (Issue of Indian
Depository Receipts) Rules, 2004 which have been made effective from 23.02.2004.
These rules have been made applicable only to those companies incorporated
outside India, whether they have or have not established any place of business
in India. These rules prescribe the criterion under which and the procedure to
be followed by the eligible companies while issuing the IDRs.
|
|
CBEC Excise Tariff
|
|
TRU Letter No. F.No.
354/27/2004-TRU Dated 28.02.2004 : The following changes have been made in the
rates of customs and central excise duties on iron and steel and coal:
(i) Excise duty on all iron and
steel falling under chapter 72 has been reduced from 16% to 8%;
(ii) Customs duty on pig iron
has been reduced from 10% to 5%;
(iii) Customs duty on
non-coking coal has been reduced from 15% to 5%;
(iv) Customs duty on coking
coal of ash content below 12% has been reduced from 5% to Nil.
Notification Nos.
44/2004-Customs and 16/2004-Central Excise, both dated 28th February, 2004, have
been issued to give effect to the above changes. These changes have been made
effective from 28.2.2004.
|
|
CBEC Customs Tariff
|
|
Circular No. 22/2004 Dated
03.03.2004 : In the matter of withholding of items involving classification
disputes, the Board has mentioned that option may be given for provisional
clearance/assessment provided in such cases if the inquiries are going to take
time. The Board has also desired that a disputed or offending consignment should
also not be held up unless its import/clearance is totally prohibited or banned
under any law for the time being in force [E.g. PFA,CITES, Weight & Measures
Act,etc.] or where prosecution is contemplated. At most, samples should be drawn
& consignment should be allowed to be cleared on provisional basis as a
matter of right.
Circular No. 21/2004 Dated
27.02.2004 : Having regard to the matter of fixing a single day for release of
"Public Notices" by the Customs Houses to enable the trade to know when to
expect any change in any procedures, the Board has cleared that certain Public
Notices cannot be kept pending till any appointed day because the delay may
result in loss of revenue or delay in clearance of imported/export goods.
Accordingly, it has been decided to fix 1st and 3rd Mondays of the month for
issuance of Public Notices by field formations, except in cases where the Public
Notice is based on Board's Circular or instructions or any notification ,
where it should be issued immediately. In case 1st or 3rd Monday happens to be a
holiday , the Public Notice should be issued on the next working day.
|
|
Service Tax
|
|
Circular No. 76/6/2004 Dated
03.03.2004 : On the matter of general difficulties being faced by Service Tax
assessees, clarifications have been provided by the Board. In the matter of
penalty for each service for delay in taking single registration for more than
one taxable service and for delay in filing of return by assessee providing more
than one taxable service it has been clarified that as per statutory provisions
only one penalty as prescribed can be imposed. Also in the matter of Issue of
Show Cause Notice for petty amounts, it has been decided that for an amount of
rupees One Thousand and below towards short payment/non-payment of service tax,
the jurisdictional officer should give an opportunity and allow the assessee to
deposit the amount of service tax not paid alongwith interest, if any.
|
|
RBI
|
|
Notification No. RPCD.
No.PLNFS.BC.69/09.04.01/2003-2004 Dated 05.03.2004 : RBI has been issuing
instructions or directions from time to time with regard to operationalisation
of the PMRY scheme. To enable the banks to have compilation of current
instructions at one place a master circular in this regard containing all the
existing guidelines /instructions /directives on the scheme has been prepared.
the master circular is updated by consolidating all the previous instructions
issued by RBI upto 29 February, 2004.
Notification No.
UBD.No.BPD.PCB.Cir.36/13.08.00/2003-2004 Dated 27.02.2004 : it has been
clarified that the bonds issued in different series would be eligible securities
for sanction of loans subject to the terms as detailed in circular
UBD.No.PCB.82/DC.(13.08.00)/92-93 dated June 2, 1993 viz.,
i) The banks should satisfy
themselves as to the acceptability of the purpose, genuiness of the credit need
of the borrower and end-use of funds lent, and should not be guided solely by
availability of Relief Bonds as security:
ii) The rate of interest should
be in accordance with the directives on interest rates issued by the Reserve
Bank of India from time to time;
iii) Adequate margin should be
kept to cover defaults, if any, in repayment of the principal and interest at
the appropriate rate.
Press Release No.
2003-2004/1043 Dated 01.03.2004 : The Reserve Bank of India had decided to put
into effect revised empanelment/categorisation norms for audit firms to be
considered as statutory central/branch auditors of 27 public sector banks with
effect from the year 2004-2005. On representation from the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India, New Delhi it has now been decided to defer the
implementation of the revised norms for a period of one year. Accordingly, the
new norms will now come into force with effect from 2005-2006 instead of
2004-2005.
Press Release No.
2003-2004/1042 Dated 01.03.2004 : The RBI has decided to reconstitute the TAC on
Money and Government Securities Markets for a further term of two years from the
day of its first meeting. The scope of the Committee has been widened to include
foreign exchange market keeping in view of its interlinkages with money and
government securities markets and its implications for monetary policy
implications. The Committee would advise the RBI, on an ongoing basis, on the
development of healthy and vibrant money, foreign exchange and government
securities markets.
Press Release No.
2003-2004/1039 Dated 01.03.2004 : The Reserve Bank of India has advised
income-tax assessees in the cities of Mumbai and Navi Mumbai to take advantage
of paying their income tax dues at any of the designated bank branches. The
income-tax department has authorised 844 computerised branches of public sector
banks and private sector banks in Mumbai and Navi Mumbai to accept payment of
income-tax dues.
|
|
DGFT
|
|
Trade Notice No. 11/ 2003-2004
Dated 26.02.2004 : Earlier IECs number had been issued with dummy PAN, as the
exporters were facing problems in PAN issued to them by Income Tax Department,
but subject to condition that the IEC holders, whom IEC was issued with dummy
PAN will revert back to this office with original IECs to get the original PAN
(which is subsequently issued to them by Income Tax Department/UTI)
incorporated. However, it has been noticed that the said IEC holders are not
coming forward to get PAN numbers incorporated into their IECs. Now, all the IEC
holders with dummy PAN have been requested to submit their IECs within a period
of 15 days for incorporating actual PAN allotted to them failing which, their
IECs will be blocked.
|
|
Department of
Telecommunications
|
|
Notification No. 414/7/99-FA
Dated 23.02.2004 : The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India has made the The
Reporting System on Accounting Separation Regulation, 2004 to be effective from
23.02.2004.
|
|
Ministry of Labour
|
|
Notification No. GSR143(E)
Dated 26.02.2004 : Amedments have been brought into the Emigration Rules, 1983
through this notification. The amendments have been made in:
(i) rule 7, wherein fees for
making application for registration of a recruiting agent has been increased
from Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 5000/-
(ii) rule 9, wherein the
validity certificate issued under the above said rules has been made valid
initially for a period of five years and shall be renewed for a period upto
twenty-five years. Before amendment the validity period was three years
(iii) rule 9A, wherein renewal
of certificate fees has been enhanced from Rs.2000/- to Rs. 25000/-.
These amendments shall come
into force with effect from 15th March. 2004
|
|
Ministry of Health
|
Cigarettes and other
Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and
Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Rules, 2004
Notification No. GSR137 Dated
25.02.2004 : The Central Government has issued Cigarettes and other Tobacco
Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce,
Production, Supply and Distribution) Rules, 2004. These rules shall come into
force on the 1st day of May, 2004. These rules have been framed to prohibit
smoking in a public place and to prohibit the advertisement of cigarette and
other tobacco products. In addition the rules are also aiming at prohibition of
sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products to minors.
|
|
Press Information Bureau
|
|
Dated 08.03.2004 : National
Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) has revised the prices of following bulk
drugs and derivatives due to reduction in the Customs Duty and abolition of
Special Additional Duty. This exercise has been carried out in order to pass on
the benefit of reduction of duties to the consumers. The price of Vitamin E
Acetate has also been revised from Rs. 1224/Kg to Rs.942/Kg based on the
detailed cost price study of M/s Merck Ltd. India. The revised notified prices
shall become effective within 15 days from the date of notification in the
Official Gazette. The notifications in this behalf have been issued in official
gazette through Order No. SO282(E) Dated 03.03.2004 and Order No. SO281(E) Dated
03.03.2004.
Dated 01.03.2004 : On demand
from exporting community the date for filing the trade returns has been extended
upto 31st of March 2004. it has been cleared that there shall not be any further
extensions, hence, IEC holders are requested to file the information by this
date. It has been further cleared that if an IEC holder does not file return by
31st of March 2004, he may risk de-activating of his IEC number.
|
|
Supreme Court |
|
The question for consideration
before Hon’ble Supreme Court was regarding the date from which the
period of validity of the waiting list for posts of Assistant
Prosecuting Officer, is to be reckoned. According to the Union Public
Service Commission it is from the first date on which the Commission
made the recommendation. The appellants took the stand that the
recommendations were done piece-meal, and therefore, it has to be from
the date on which the last recommendation was made.
Apex Court held that in view of
the peculiar nature of the fact situation, it would be inequitable and
unjust to compute the one-year period from the date when the first
recommendation was made by the Commission. The Bench further clarified
that if the Commission's stand is that the validity period of the
waiting list is one year, it should have sought for clarification from
State Government as to why unfilled posts were included in the
requisition, when its specific stand was being contrary to office
memorandum. Further the Court directed to both the State Government and
the Commission to remain more vigilant and constructive in their
approach and their stands have to be consistent while dealing with the
careers of large number of candidates.
The appeal raised before Hon’ble
Supreme Court was directed to validate whether termination of services
of respondent workmen due to unauthorized absence from duty by
appellant company under standing orders was justified. It was pleaded
by appellant that High Court ought not to have entertained writ
petition at all since disputed questions of fact were involved and
matter ought to have been left for decision under Industrial Dispute
Act.
Apex Court allowing the appeal
held that where the statute gives a specific remedy, the person who
insists upon such remedy could avail of the process as provided in that
statute and in no other manner. Since dispute being an industrial
dispute both within meaning of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as well as
UPIDA, 1947, High Court erred in entertaining writ petition of
respondent Union. The Bench further clarified that Certified Standing
Orders do not constitute Statutory Provisions in the sense that
dismissal or removal of an employee in contravention of the Certified
Standing Orders would be a contravention of statutory provisions
enabling the workman to file a writ petition for their enforcement.
The issue of alternative remedy
should be raised and decided at the earliest opportunity so that a
litigant is not prejudiced by the action of the Court since the
objection is one in the nature of a demurer. Nevertheless even when
there has been such a delay where the issue raised requires the
resolution of factual controversies, the High Court should not, even
when there is a delay, short-circuit the process for effectively
determining the facts. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that
when it was drawn to the attention of the High Court that a previous
writ petition raising the same issue had been dismissed on the ground
of the existence of an adequate alternative remedy, the High Court
should not have continued to dispose of the matter itself under Article
226 and in effect set aside the decision in the previous writ petition.
Petition was filed before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by
the pensioners who had been serving the Assam Oil Company Limited,
having retired on or before October 13, 1981 to claim the benefits of
the revised pension scheme as made admissible to the retirees of Indian
Oil Corporation without any distinction or cut-off date of retirement.
Apex Court held that if a
person is already getting pensionary benefits and an amendment is
effected for upward increase in pension, such a retiree would be
entitled for the enhanced benefit and the same could not be denied for
the reason that he had already retired before the change came into
effect and certainly those who were not entitled for pension at all,
could not be included in the fold of the pensioners to whom enhancement
of pensionary benefit would be applicable.
Further, Apex Court held that
the pensioners were the members of the existing pension fund at the
time of taking over of the undertaking by the central government.
Pension fund also stood transferred and vested in the central
government / successor company as would be evident from the averments
made in the scheme framed in the year 1983 and in such circumstances
the petitioners would be entitled for the benefit of the new formula
introduced in 1995. - Appeal was allowed.
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer |
|
(1) While all reasonable care has
been taken to ensure that the information provided in the "round
up" and on the website is fair and accurate the company and its
promoters and employees shall not in any way be responsible for
the consequences of any action taken on the basis of reliance
upon the contents of this "round up". |
|
(2) This is not a
Spam mail. You have received this mail because you have either
requested for it or someone must have suggested your name under
our various referral programs. Since India has no anti-spamming
law, we refer to the US directive, which states that a mail
cannot be considered Spam if it contains the sender's contact
information, which this mail does. In case this mail doesn't
concern you, please unsubscribe from mailing
list.
Feedback
|
|
