NRI Legal Services 815, Sec 16D, Chandigarh – Not known Facts About NRI Legal Services
70(4) was incompetent as the Commissioner was present in the suit and the compromise decree was passed with the knowledge of the Commissioner and there was no need for a fresh notice to him under s. The enquiry, according to him, was contrary to the principles of natural justice without giving him an opportunity nrilegalservices to place his defence and it was also held in disregard of cl. According to him the various allegations made against him were vague and had not been established and there has http://nrilegalservices.me been no proper enquiry conducted against him.
The Kings could, therefore, have filed a complaint with the Secretary. The respondent-plaintiff originally entered service with the appellant as www.nrilegalservices.me a Technical Assistant in November 1958 and later he was promoted to the post of Warehouseman on October 15, 1959. 70(4) of the Act for a declaration that the decree was void as no notice was given to him under s. The truth is that for entirely bona fide reasons, conceived in the best interests of L, any possible resistance by him was overcome by sedation, by taking him to hospital and by close supervision of him in hospital and, if L had shown any sign of wanting to leave, he would have been firmly discouraged by staff and, if necessary, physically prevented from doing so.
This is so even if the judgment is that the earlier UNHCR determination is incompatible with what is currently considered to be the right decision. The appellant appealed to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Howrah and the appeal was allowed. They claimed that the work done by the workmen at Visakhapatnam Port was exactly similar to the type of work done by the Stevedores workmen at Bombay, Calcutta, Cochin and Madras and that therefore their claim for bonus was justified.
Responsibility for oversight of the airline industry has been entrusted to the Secretary of Transportation. Moreover, while private suits are an important vehicle for enforcing the anti-discrimination laws, they are hardly the only means of preventing discrimination on board aircraft. It was held that the application under s. They referred to the demands made by them for payment. The respondent instituted Civil Suit No. The suggestion that L was free to go was a fairy tale.
nrilegalservices.me and a learned single Judge of the High Court by the order, now nrilegalservices under appeal, reversed the decision of the Subordinate Judge and restored the decree of the Munsif. 201 of 1964 challenging the order of dismissal. The FAA prohibits air carriers, including foreign air carriers, from subjecting a person to ‚unreasonable discrimination. This argument stretches credulity to breaking point. On June 20, 1958 the Commissioner made an application under s. The Commissioner then filed a revision under s.
Departure from an earlier decision of UNHCR for the reason that it can be considered nrilegalservices to be wrong is inevitably problematical if the basis on which that decision was taken remains unexplained. On that account, I do not consider that it is helpful to approach the question of the weight to be given to the UNHCR determination by asking whether it was right or wrong. The order is challenged in this appeal. They further referred to the fact that the Board and the Stevedores Association were all governed by the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act 1948 (Act IX of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Vizagapatam Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme), framed thereunder.
He was confirmed in 1962 in the said post. The appellant objected but on April 20, 1960 the Munsif allowed the application and declared the decree to be void. Federal law provides other remedies. „Counsel for the trust and the Secretary of State argued that L was in truth always free not to go to the hospital and subsequently to leave the hospital. The Unions claimed bonus at 14 paise per ton for 196465, 15 paise per ton for 1965-66 and 16 paise per ton for 1966-67.
After an enquiry the respondent was found guilty and in consequence dismissed from service of the appellant by order dated March 10, 1964. The Secretary has the authority to address violations of FAA provisions, including the power to file civil actions to enforce federal law. If nothing is known of the basis on which the earlier determination was made, it is difficult to see how it can be condemned as wrong even if the current view is that refusal of asylum is plainly right.
It does not follow from the preemption of the Kings‘ private cause of action that air carriers will have free rein to discriminate against passengers during the course of an international flight. Certain charges were framed against the respondent and pending the enquiry into those charges he was placed under suspension on 252 September 9, 1963. They referred to certain agreements having been reached in respect of bonus between the workmen and the respective Stevedores Associations, in Calcutta, Cochin, Madras and Bombay.
Both the Unions filed statements of claim on behalf of their workmen. of bonus and the rejection thereof by the Board and the Stevedores Association. The said Scheme is similar to the Scheme obtaining in the areas where a settlement had been entered into regarding bonus and the relationship between the Stevedores and the Dock Labour Board was also the same in all ports.
