Madras High Court grants interim stay to G.O. on minimum wages for hosiery workers
Trade union sources said the Hosiery Minimum Wages Act 1960 was revised in 2016 and in 2018 a clause of domestic knitwear workers was added to it. In January last year, the government issued a draft on fixing minimum wages for the garment unit workers based on the Hosiery Minimum Wages Act. The final order was released in February this year. However, according to the new order, the workers will suffer a DA reduction of ₹1,700 a month.
The trade unions challenged this order in the High Court and the Court has issued a stay. The CITU banian worker union general secretary in Tiruppur G. Sampath said the garment unit workers were mostly paid based on a tripartite wage agreement involving the managements and the trade unions. However, there were issues in the way the minimum wages had been calculated. The new order was applicable to workers in the domestic and export units. Since a monthly reduction of ₹1,700 would hit the workers, it was decided to go to the court. 'We need to follow up the case closely and ensure that the workers get the right wages,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
14 hours ago
- Time of India
Property puzzle: UT moves to untangle decades of delay
Chandigarh: Lakhs of property owners in the city, both residential and commercial, are caught up in a labyrinth of property-related laws and rules. Hundreds of applications related to estate matters have been pending for decades because of a lack of clarity on key property policy issues. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now This leads not only to their harassment but also leaves a lot of discretion with the estate office. Now, the Chandigarh administration has finally realised the need to resolve such long-pending property-related issues. An exercise of identifying such problems has been completed, and a further course of action has been recommended along with it for the competent authorities to decide upon. Let's look at some of the key issues and their possible solutions. Issue 1: Policy on Share-Wise Transfer Among Co-Owners Who Are Strangers At present, the policy does not allow share-wise transfers among strangers. The High Court, while disposing of various petitions filed against the public notice dated February 9, 2023 (whereby share-wise transfers were allowed only among family members), upheld the Administration's position but also observed that share-wise transfers among co-owners who are strangers may be permitted as it leads to the consolidation of property shares. Suggestion: The matter may be decided expeditiously in light of the High Court's observations on whether to allow such transfers under specific terms and conditions or not. Issue 2: Delay in Granting Transfer, NOC, or Mortgage Permissions Due to No Response from Investigative Agencies The estate office frequently receives letters from agencies like the police, income tax, etc., seeking details of various properties. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now When property owners later apply for transfer, NOC, or mortgage permissions, the estate office seeks clearance from these enforcement bodies again, but frequently no response is received. In order to avoid any legal issues and due to procedural uncertainty, the office keeps applications pending or rejects them for want of clearance from the agency. Suggestion: To formalise the practice that if no response is received from the enforcement agency within 30 days of the request for clearance, the application may be processed, treating it as "No Objection" from the agency. This would prevent indefinite delays. Issue 3: Resumed Sites Restored with Conditions—Compliance Not Found in Records Many sites were resumed and later restored by the appellate/revisional authority subject to compliance (e.g., payment of forfeiture). However, proof of compliance is not traceable in records. Meanwhile, sites have changed hands multiple times, and now current owners are seeking rectification of site status. In some cases, NOC was issued by the office before transfer. Also, in some cases, some properties are marked "Resumed" online in the CMIS portal solely based on entries in the Peshi Branch Register. No supporting resumption/restoration order or any other document is found in the records of any concerned branches. Suggestion: A decision should be taken as to whether to restore the site in the absence of proof or continue to treat the site as resumed. Whether such entries alone are sufficient to mark the status as resumed or may update the status of the property as restored. Issue 4: Penalty in Compoundable Building Violation Cases The earlier practice was to impose a penalty in all violations, even if compoundable. The notification dated March 28, 2016, amended this, clarifying that only unpermitted coverage attracts penal charges. The issue arises where SCN for building violations, including sanctionable violations, was initiated before the above date but proceedings remain pending or decided after the rule change. Suggestion: Levying penalty charges will lead to double payment, so if compounded, it is suggested that building violation charges may not be imposed. OTHER ISSUES IDENTIFIED SEEKING DECISION Building Violation Cases Before CBR-2017 Implementation: Decision pending on hundreds of cases of building violations where the constructions were done before the implementation of Chandigarh Building Rules 2017, and applicants also submitted plans for compounding. Meanwhile, with the implementation of CBR(U)-2017, rules changed, and now, compounding is not allowed under amended rules, which was allowed in repealed rules. Minor Modifications in Houses Sold in Multiple Shares: Properties sold in multiple shares; owners often seek permission for minor alterations where no additional construction is proposed. However, the current system lacks provisions to allow such plans. Need for Policy Decision on Treatment of Property Transfers Executed through GPA/SPA/ATS/IWILL to ensure recovery of dues against underhand sales.
Hans India
2 days ago
- Hans India
GoI appoints Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy as judicial member of GST Appellate Tribunal
Hyderabad: The Government of India has officially appointed Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy, Senior Advocate at the Telangana High Court, as a Judicial Member of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT). This appointment is part of a broader move by the government to make the GST Appellate Tribunal fully operational. A total of 53 Judicial Members have been approved for appointment, marking a significant milestone in strengthening the dispute resolution framework under the GST regime. Vemireddy Bhaskar Reddy is a designated Senior Advocate at Telangana High Court. He was enrolled as an Advocate in 1987 and he has been practicing since then before the High Court at Hyderabad. He specialized in tax laws. He was appointed as Spl Assistant Govt pleader for taxes before the High Court for taxes in 1993 and worked till June 1994. He has been designated as Senior Advocate by Telangana High Court in 2022. The establishment of a robust and efficient GST appellate system is expected to reduce litigation timelines and enhance trust in the indirect tax system.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
'Parasakthi' producer Aakash Baskaran's Tasmac case, Madras High Court slaps Rs. 30,000 fine on ED
In April, enforcement officials conducted raids at the Tasmac headquarters and several liquor factories in connection with a large-scale fraud allegedly taking place at the Tasmac Corporation. Authorities said that a fraud of around ₹1,000 crore had taken place at that time. Searches were conducted at the homes and offices of 'Parasakthi' producer Aakash Baskaran and businessman Vikram Ravindran in connection with the matter. At the end of the investigation, Vikram Ravindran's assets were sealed. Here's a detailed report. Aakash Baskaran and Vikram Ravindran move court to lift asset seal Aakash Baskaran and Vikram Ravindran filed a case in the Madras High Court against this action. In this case, they demanded that the enforcement department's action be stayed and that the seal placed on their properties be removed. According to Nakkheeran, during the trial, Aakash Baskaran was ordered to return the seized documents, and an order was issued to temporarily halt further proceedings. ED seeks more time during August 6 hearing The case came up for hearing again on August 6. On this occasion, the lawyer appearing for the Enforcement Directorate said that the reply petition has not yet been prepared. Therefore, he requested more time. The judges expressed their strong dissatisfaction with this. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Mr. Bala's Powerful Intraday Strategy Revealed – No More Guesswork TradeWise Learn More Undo The judges also strongly criticized that not responding even after being granted time twice was not proper practice. Court imposes Rs. 30,000 fine on ED for procedural lapse The Enforcement Directorate stated that it was required to file a joint response and requested that time be granted only this time. But the judges opposed it and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000 each, for a total of ₹30,000 on the enforcement department. The court ordered that this amount be paid to the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court's relief fund and adjourned the next hearing of the case to the 20th.
