You may also like...
-
Judge s vaithiyanathan sir dismissed the Writ Petition and disagreeing with the decision rendered by this Court in S.Balasubramanian and others vs. State, reported in (2013) 2 LW (Cri) 289, referred the matter to a Larger Bench to decide the following issues: i) Whether a Company should be made as a party, when the Government is going to sanction prosecution under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for not implementing the provisions of the Act against persons falling under Section 32 of the Act, 1947; ii) Whether a Company should be made as a party, when the words “as well as the Company” are absent under Section 32 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as the same is not in pari materia with the provisions of Section 141 of the N.I.Act. [6/7, 14:48] Sekarreporter1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.02.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.2869 of 2021 P.Rajendran … Petitioner -vs- The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Coimbatore Division – II) Ltd, Chennimalai Road, Erode-1.
by Sekar Reporter · Published June 7, 2021
-
There is a dispute with regard to installation of idols and poojas conducted by the petitioner and that whether Samaj is a public temple or not. This disputed questions of fact cannot be decided in the Writ Proceedings. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings before the appropriate forum. Ayothiya mandabam case full order of THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P.No.449 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2014 M/s. Sri Ram Samaj,
by Sekar Reporter · Published April 12, 2022
-