Air india statutory corporation v united

You need to be a member to access this feature!

Air india statutory corporation v united

To bring freedom in a comprehensive sense to the common man, material resources and opportunity for appointment be made available to secure socio-economic empowerment which would Air india statutory corporation v united justice and fullness of life to workmen, i.

As we have seen, in the prophetic concept of justice the misery of the poor called for dividne retribution, since alleviating misery was believed to be a matter not of optional charity but of moral duty, To neglect this duty was to sin, to breach the divine laws.

Air india statutory corporation v united

Plato proposed the abolition of private property for the caste of guardians in order to make the Republic as a whole just. Aristotle, who coined the term 'distributive justice', recommended a relative equality of wealth neither too much nor too little, but 'medium wealth' — as a condition of the good life of the good citizen and the good city.

Locke did not completely break with this longstanding tradition either. As we have seen, he contributed to the emergence of the concept' retributive justice' rather than 'distributive justice.

However, he had already presented a sophisticated theory legitimizing inequality in property owner ship, a theory deriving property from work. I have mentioned that Locke did not support the idea 'to each according to his entitlement', for he but 'entitlement' into the 'to each category, whereas the 'according to category was defined by 'work' mixing work and nature.

But Locke never claimed that entitlement was the main issue, let alone the only issue of justice. Humane is undoubtedly the founding father of that branch of socio political justice now called 'distributive'. He even claimed that property and property alone is the subject matter of justice.

He asserted too that retribution negative sanctions in the suspension of justice for the sake of social utility: Humane also deduced justice from 'public utility'.

Inequality in property ownership is just because it is useful. We can imagine two cases — and extreme cases- where property inequality in property ownership qua justice loses its social usefulness: In the former, property is useless, redundant because, if all needs can be satisfied, we are beyond justice.

In the latter situation property rules are violable, thus justice must be be suspended. Yet we live in a situation of limited abundance or limited scarcity.

This is Humane the concept 'justice' reduces to the idea 'to reach according to his property entitlement'; all other uses of the notion 'justice' are seen as relating to the 'suspension of justice' although the term 'equity' can remain relevant in these other contexts. Humane, an extremely sincere man, did not shirk from facing proposal alien to his own.

He stated, nature is so liberal to mankind, that. It must also be confessed, that, wherever we depart from this equality, we rob the poor of more satisfaction than we add to the rich. It is only by implementing the Directive Principle that distributive justice will be achieved in the society.

The majority had held in favour of the way for the implementation of the Directive Principles under rule of law. Justice Palekar, in particular had laid emphasis on social and economic justice to make fundamental Rights a reality.

In Corpus Juris Secunderon Vol. This Statement was quoted with approval by the Supreme court of United States of America in in leading judgment, munn vs the people of Illinois [94 US ]. It was held that the statute simply extends the law so as to meet this new development of commercial progress.

There is no attempt to compel the owners to grant the public an interest in their property, but the Act declares their obligations, if they use it in the particular manner.

It is immaterial whether the plaintiffs therein had built their warehouses and established their business before the regulation was made.

It was held that after, the regulation has come into force, they are enjoined to abide by the regulation to carry on the business. The power to deny the welfare benefit was negated by judicial pronouncement.

In Grace Marsh vs.

In Perpetual Beta

State of Alabama [90 L. On writ of certiorary, the Supreme Court of United States of America deciding the right to pass and repass and the right of freedom of expression and equality under 14th amendment, had held by majority that the corporate's right to control the inhabitants of the colony is subject to regulation but the ownership does not always mean absolute denomination.

The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property in use by public in general, the more do his right become circumscribed by statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it. The conviction was in violation of Ist and 14th Amendment. In Republic Aviation Corporation vs. It was subject to State regulation.

The Supreme court, therefore, had held that when the rights of the private owners and the constitutional rights requires interpretation, the balance has to be struck and the court would, mindful of the Fact that the right to exercise liberties safeguarded by the Constitution lies at the foundation of free government by free men, in all cases weigh the circumstances and appraise the reasons in support of the regulations of the rights etc.

SC shock for contract labour | Kolkata News - Times of India

It was accordingly held that for interpretation of the rights, it is but the duty of the Court to weigh the balance and to consider the case in the dropback. German Aliance Insurance Co.

Air india statutory corporation v united

IKL Lews US ], per majority it was held that a business may be as far as affected with a public interest as to permit legislative regulation of its rates and charges, although no public trust is imposed upon the property and although public way not have a legal right to demand and receive service.

It is true that in Dena Nath's case, a Bench of two judges was to consider the question whether or not the persons appointed as contract labour in violation of section 7 and 12 of the Act should be deemed to be direct employees of the principal employer.

The Bench on literal consideration of the provisions, had concluded that the act merely regulates condition s of service of the workmen employed by a contractor and engaged by the principal employer.Subsequently, Air India Statutory Corporations v.

United Labour Union ruled that on the abolition of the system of contract labour the workmen were entitled for absorption, and the court had powers under the Art to direct the employers to absorb such workers.

Again in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. K.V. Shramik Sangh the SC had the same view point as in the case of Air India Statutory Corp.

v. United Labour Union and gave the same reasoning as well.

Air India Statutory Corporation vs United Labour Union & Ors on 6 November,

The appellant initially was a statutory authority under International Airport Authority of India Act, (for short, 'iaai Act') and on its repeal by the Airports Authority of India Act, was amalgamated with National Airport Authority (for short, the 'naa') under single nomenclature, namely, IAAI.

United Labour Union & Ors (4) Retrieved 07, , from "Air India Statutory Corporation. V. The controversy raised in this case is squarely Covered by the judgment of this Court in Air India Statutory corporation etc.

v. United labour union & Ors. [ (9) SCALE 70]. Their contract was terminated in December and they challenged the writ petition in and High Court, therefore was justified in dismissing the writ petition on.

Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Bijulee Bhawan, Paltan Bazaar, Guwahati-1, Represented By Its Chief General Manager (Hr), Bijulee Bhawan, Paltan Bazar, Guwahati-1 vs. 1.

The State Of Assam, Represented By The Secretary To The Govt.

Air India Statutory Corporation. V. United Labour Union | Free Essays -