{"id":298550,"date":"2023-08-04T17:00:12","date_gmt":"2023-08-04T11:30:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=298550"},"modified":"2023-08-04T16:45:36","modified_gmt":"2023-08-04T11:15:36","slug":"beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/b> In an appeal against judgment passed by Bombay High Court confirming award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (‘CGIT’) on 30-03-2017 rejecting the demand of Bharatiya Kamgar Karmachari Mahasangh (‘Union’) for reinstatement with full back wages, the Division Bench of Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. upheld the benefits which the Union was entitled to and set aside the said award and its confirmation.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h4>\n

Jet Airways is a renowned commercial airline and the Union represented 169 workmen temporarily engaged by Jet Airways on a fixed-term contract in various cadres like loader-cum-cleaners, drivers and operators. The Union contended that workmen were treated as temporary even after completing 240 days in service in accordance with the Model Standing Order under Bombay Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1959 (‘1959 Rules’) and the nature of work being permanent and regular. The Union raised a charter of demands wherein, the Union gave up permanency demands, which was negotiated upon and led to settlement dated 2-05-2002 that conferred many benefits on workmen giving up the demand. Jet Airways claimed that workers were not entitled to permanency as per the said settlement.<\/p>\n

Impugned Order by CGIT<\/h4>\n

The workmen raised disputes and matter came up for adjudication. In the impugned award, CGIT framed the issue of whether the Union’s demand for re-employment\/reinstatement of 169 workmen in service with full back wages was just and proper, and answered the same negatively. It further relied on Section 25-H<\/a> of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947<\/a> and held that there was no retrenchment because non-renewal of fixed term contract did not amount as per Section 2(oo)(bb) and there was no question of re-employment.<\/p>\n

Court’s Analysis<\/h4>\n

• Issue 1 –<\/b> Which is the appropriate authority empowered to issue the Standing Orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946<\/a> (‘1946 Act’)?<\/p>\n

The Court scrutinized the applicability of 1946 Act in terms of industrial establishments and the appropriate government empowered to govern them. The 1959 Rules were issued by the State while exercising powers under Section 15 of 1946 Act. The Court clarified that for Jet Airways in the instant matter, the appropriate government was not Central but State since Jet Airways was not under Central Government’s control. Therefore, the 1959 Rules would be applicable to the parties in the instant matter as upheld by the Court.<\/p>\n

• Issue 2 –<\/b> Whether private agreement\/settlement between the parties would override the Standing Order?<\/p>\n

The Court hinted towards several previous occasions when the Court observed about the certified standing orders having statutory force and implying a contract between employer and workman, who cannot enter into an overriding statutory contract already embodied in the certified standing orders. The Court specifically relied on three-judge bench decision in U.P. SEB v. Hari Shankar Jain<\/i>, (1978) 4 SCC 16<\/a> wherein, it was laid down that the 1946 Act was specially designed<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    to define the terms of employment of workmen in industrial establishments,<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    to give the workmen a collective voice in determining the terms of employment, and<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    to subject the terms of employment to the scrutiny of quasi-judicial authorities by the application of the test of fairness and reasonableness.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The Court regarded the 1946 Act as a special Act expressly and exclusively dealing with the schedule-enumerated conditions of service of workmen in industrial establishments, giving recognition and form to workmen’s hard-won and precious rights.<\/p>\n

    The Court further relied on and referred to Sudhir Chandra Sarkar<\/i> v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.<\/i>, (1984) 3 SCC 369<\/a> and Western India Match Co. Ltd.<\/i> v. Workmen<\/i>, (1974) 3 SCC 330<\/a> discussing the letter and spirit of the 1946 Act. It further cited Rasiklal Vaghajibhai Patel<\/i> v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn.<\/i>, (1985) 2 SCC 35<\/a> wherein the Court relied on Western India Match Co. Ltd.<\/i> v. Workmen<\/i>, (1974) 3 SCC 330<\/a> to hold that “any condition of service, if inconsistent with certified standing orders, would not prevail, as the certified standing orders would have precedence over all such agreements. Any settlement, the employee Union enters into with the Employer would not override the Model Standing Order, unless it is more beneficial to the employees.”<\/i><\/p>\n

    The Court perused the decision of CGIT and its confirmation by the High Court and disagreed with their findings. The Court re-analysed the relevant clauses of 1959 Rules, particularly Clause 4C and Clause 32 which revealed that “a workman who has worked for 240 days in an establishment would be entitled to be made permanent, and no contract\/settlement which abridges such a right can be agreed upon, let alone be binding. The Act being the beneficial legislation provides that any agreement\/contract\/settlement wherein the rights of the employees are waived off would not override the Standing Orders.”<\/i><\/p>\n

    The Court refrained from commenting over the insolvency proceedings initiated against Jet Airways and allowed the instant appeal. The Court held the Union entitled to the benefits as per 1959 Rules while quashing and setting aside the award passed by CGIT and its confirmation by the High Court.<\/p>\n

    [Bharatiya Kamgar Karmachari Mahasangh v. Jet Airways Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 872<\/a>, decided on 25-07-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

    Judgment by: Justice Sanjay Karol<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    For Appellants: Senior Advocate Sanjay Singhvi, Advocate Nitin S. Tambwekar, Advocate on Record Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru;<\/p>\n

    For Respondents: Advocate Ujjwal A. Rana, Advocate Himanshu Mehta.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Supreme Court regarded the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 as a special Act expressly and exclusively dealing with the schedule-enumerated conditions of service of workmen in industrial establishments, giving recognition and form to workmen’s hard-won and precious rights.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67513,"featured_media":298584,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[45066,31594,45065,5363],"class_list":["post-298550","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-industrial-employment","tag-jet-airways","tag-standing-orders","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\n'Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements'; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-08-04T11:30:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ridhi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/\",\"name\":\"'Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements'; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-08-04T11:30:12+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\"},\"description\":\"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"employer-employee agreements\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea\",\"name\":\"Ridhi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ridhi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"'Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements'; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency | SCC Blog","description":"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency","og_description":"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-08-04T11:30:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ridhi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ridhi","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/","name":"'Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements'; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp","datePublished":"2023-08-04T11:30:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea"},"description":"Prevalence of beneficial Standing Orders over employer-employee agreements, SC held workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"employer-employee agreements"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/beneficial-standing-orders-prevail-over-employer-employee-agreements-sc-temporary-workmen-jet-airways-permanency\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Beneficial Standing Orders to prevail over employer-employee agreements\u2019; SC holds workmen temporarily engaged with Jet Airways entitled to permanency"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/a21428c608a56b14de2f1880af8ab8ea","name":"Ridhi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bb725ff04af51d6ea760aba8bfa827caa7c4b3ff053baff285d71a0ab546955?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ridhi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/employer-employee-agreements.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":283286,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/06\/supreme-court-upholds-nclat-order-on-payment-of-dues-to-former-employees-of-jet-airways-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":0},"title":"Supreme Court upholds NCLAT order on payment of dues to former employees of Jet Airways","author":"Editor","date":"February 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea moved by the consortium and upheld the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal's order directing the consortium to pay the provident fund and gratuity dues of the employees of Jet Airways","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-300.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":267667,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/31\/jet-airways-resolution-plans-implementation-is-subject-to-the-outcome-of-nclat\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":1},"title":"Jet Airways Resolution Plan\u2019s implementation is subject to the outcome of? Here\u2019s NCLAT\u2019s order","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 31, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (NCLAT): The Coram of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shreesha Merla (Technical Member), held that the implementation of the Jet Airways Resolution Plan will be subject to the outcome of appeals filed against the order of National Company Law Tribunal which approved the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"NCLAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244343,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/24\/jet-airways\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":2},"title":"NCLT | Whether Resolution Plan can be shared with Jet Airways employees or not? Verdict explains provisions revolving around confidentiality, purpose of code and more","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 24, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench: The Coram of Janab Mohammed Ajmal (Judicial Member) and V. Nallasenapathy (Technical Member),\u00a0 decided the issue of whether the Resolution Plan could be shared with the employees of Jet Airways. Who all are the applicants? Pilots of Jet Airways (Corporate Debtor) were represented by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/00E67A45-C096-4F93-9021-96B9799B680D.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/00E67A45-C096-4F93-9021-96B9799B680D.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/00E67A45-C096-4F93-9021-96B9799B680D.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/00E67A45-C096-4F93-9021-96B9799B680D.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/00E67A45-C096-4F93-9021-96B9799B680D.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":276123,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/24\/non-payment-of-full-provident-fund-and-gratuity-violative-of-s-302e-ibc-nclat-directs-jet-airways-to-make-payments\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":3},"title":"Non-payment of full provident fund and gratuity violative of S. 30(2)(e) IBC; NCLAT directs Jet Airways to make payments","author":"Editor","date":"October 24, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi: In a batch of appeals filed challenging order dated 22-06-2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai approving the Resolution Plan submitted by \u2018Jalan Fritesch Consortium\u2019 with respect to the Corporate Debtor - \u2018Jet Airways (India) Limited\u2019 on various grounds\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"NCLAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":261773,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/15\/mumbai-international-airport-limited-temporarily-restrained-from-removing-jet-airways-assets-from-its-premises\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":4},"title":"NCLT | Mumbai International Airport Limited temporarily restrained from removing Jet Airways assets from its premises including MIAL\u2019s hangar: Airline\u2019s representatives, workmen, etc. allowed access for maintenance of assets","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT): The Coram of Kapal Kumar Vohra, Technical Member and Justice P.N. Deshmukh, Judicial Member, while addressing a matter wherein Jet Airways requested Mumbai Airport not remove its assets from its premises, expressed that, \u201c\u2026it is to be noted that one of the principal objectives of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Company Law Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260798,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/29\/once-adjudicating-authority-approves-resolution-plan-does-it-still-remains-a-confidential-document\/","url_meta":{"origin":298550,"position":5},"title":"Once Adjudicating Authority approves Resolution Plan, does it still remains a confidential document? Read what NCLAT says","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 29, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Dr Ashok Kumar Mishra (Technical Member) expressed that, once Resolution Plain is approved by the Adjudicating Authority, it no longer remains a confidential document, so as to preclude Regulator and other persons from accessing the said document. Whether the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/298550","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67513"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=298550"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/298550\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/298584"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=298550"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=298550"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=298550"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}