Bombay High Court Monthly Digest: June 2024 [Citations 278-319]

Nominal Index [Citation 278 - 319]Airports Authority of India Workers Union & Anr v. Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 278Omkara Assets Reconstruction In the matter of ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Classic Diamonds (India) Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 279Azhar Basha Tamboli Ltd & Ors v. Ravi S Gupta & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 280Azhar Basha Tamboli v. Ravi S Gupta & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 281Rajiv Bansal & Ors vs State of Maharashtra and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 282The Chief Officer, Pen Municipal Council & Ors. v. Shekhar B. Abhang & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 283Shamsher Ahmed Shaikh & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 284Razi Ahmed Khan v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 285XYZ v. The Dean of BJ, Government Medical College and Others 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 286Karan Johar v. IndiaPride Advisory Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 287Jiv Maitri Trust v. Union of India & Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 288Gopal C. Mehta & Ors. v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 289Kalpana and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 290Jaiprakash Kulkarni v. The Banking Ombudsman and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 291Hajrat Peer Malik Rehan Mira Saheb Dargah, Vishalgad v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 292Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Gleck Pharma (OPC) Pvt Ltd. & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 293Pidilite Industries Limited v. Astral Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 294Saket Abhiraj Jha v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 295Sarwan Kumar Jhabarmal Choudhary v. Sachin Shyamsundar Begrajka 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 296Chemco Plast Applicant/Defendant In the matter between: Chemco Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Chemco Plast 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 297XYZ v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 298Azhar Basha Tamboli v. Ravi S Gupta & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 299Ramesh Ratan Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 300KN Surendran Pillai v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 301Film & Television Producers Guild of India (FPGI) ) v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 302Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 303Bombay Iron And Steel Labour Board v. State Bank of India 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 304ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd. v. UOI 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 305Piramal Enterprises Limited v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 306Godrej Projects Development and Anr. v. Zakir Ramzan Qureshi and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 307 Patil Samgonda Namgonda v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 308Shripad Dwarkanath Gupte and Ors v. Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 309CFM Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. M/s. SAR Parivahan Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 310Kapil Suresh Taak v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 311M/s Halliburton India Operations Private Limited v. Vision Projects Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 312Mangalam Organics Ltd. v. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 313XYZ v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 314Zainab Abdul Qayyum Choudhary & Ors. v. Chembur Trombay Education Society's NG Acharya and DK Marathe College and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 315Karvy Innotech Limited v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 316Amol Bhagwan Nehul v. State of Maharashtra 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 317Fabricship Pvt. Ltd. v. UoI 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 318Sanjeev Suresh Desai v. UoI 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 319Reports/JudgmentsBirth Of First Child Before Joining Service not a bar for availing Maternity Leave After Joining Service Under AAI Regulations: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Airports Authority of India Workers Union & Anr v. Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Anr.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 278A Division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice A. S. Chandurkar and Justice Jitendra Jain in the case of Airports Authority of India Workers Union & Anr Vs The Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour & Anr held that birth of a first child before joining the service is not relevant for considering of maternity leave after joining the service. The object of Maternity Benefit Regulation under AAI Regulations is not to curb the population but to give such benefit only on two occasions during the service period.The court further held that“The object of the Maternity Benefit Regulation which is posed for our consideration is not to curb the population but to give such benefit only on two occasions during the service period and, therefore, it is in that context that the condition of two surviving children is imposed”Thus the court held that the birth of the first child from the first marriage before joining the service would not be relevant for considering the claim of maternity leave post her joining the Respondent for the purposes of the 2003 Regulation.With the aforesaid observations, the court allowed the writ petition.No Irreversible Actions In Winding Up, Company Court Can Transfer Proceedings To NCLT: Bombay High CourtCase Title:...

Bombay High Court Monthly Digest: June 2024 [Citations 278-319]

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags