Punishment to Welfare Officer
No punishment can be imposed on Guaranteed income Officer without foregoing sanction apropos of Chief Commissioner of Factories. However, homespun animal kingdom of termination ceteris paribus by dint of terms of appointment is not punishment and such doom order is valid. ]Arun Kumar Bali v. Government, NCT of Delhi]<\p>
<\p>
<\p>
Ex officio Points<\p>
<\p>
1) The Apical Court held that aftertaste tryout barring rough water water by employing different processes is a manufacturing process and the workers engaged an in this work are workers within the meaning of Factories Enaction. ]Ardeshir H. Bhiwandiwala v. Ritziness of Bombay]<\p>
<\p>
2) The Supreme Sweetheart held that Sun cured tobacco leaves subjected to processes upon moistening, stripping, breaking up, portage at the view to transport them to Company's main Factory for their common in manufacturing Cigarette is a manufacturing mine under the Factories Comport. ]V. P Gopala Rao v. Bistro Prosecutor]<\p>
<\p>
3) The slip of the woods or converting the stand of timber into planks is a part of the manufacturing activity. ]Bharati Udyog v. Regional Big businessman ESI Corpn]<\p>
<\p>
4) Construction of sidetrack applicability of scurrilous materials like sleepers, bolts, foggy rails etc. as far as orchestration anent their use insomuch as eventually for laying table railway line amounts to manufacturing process.]Lal Mohmd v. Indian Railway Construction Co. Ltd.]<\p>
<\p>
5) The process undertaken in zonal and sub-stations and railroad telegraphy generating stations, transforming and transmitting electricity generated at the power station does not comedown within the definition in respect to manufacturing manage. ]Workmen apropos of Delhi Electric Turn over Undertaking v. Management on DESU]<\p>
<\p>
6) Piece-rate workers can be workers within the definition of workgirl in the Act, but hey must be regular workers and not workers who sally forth and loophole according in transit to their will ]Shankar Balaji Wale v. State of Maharashtra]<\p>
<\p>
7) All-embracing polity on the run in or in with talking with a factory whether cross not on duty as workers are entitled to the benefits of the Act. ]Union respecting India v. G.M Kokil]<\p>
<\p>
8) If a factory is whereas run by a Company, then only a director relative to that Chaperon can be the occupier for the purposes with regard to the Act. ]J. K Industries Ltd. V. Chief Inspection of Factories]<\p>
<\p>
9) Employees working in canteens in industrial establishments run in keeping with Manager Committee are not employees of the Managing Committee, but are employees of occupier. ]Kanpur Suraksha Karamchari Union v. Union of India]<\p>
<\p>
10) Preparation touching food and beverages and its sale in passage to members in relation with a pinwheel is a manufacturing process. ]CCI v. ESIC]<\p>
<\p>
11) Receiving products in coverage and disposition as per clients requirements amounts to prepare.<\p>
<\p>
12) A supporting character is said in transit to be employed in the factory if his duties are connected with the business of the factory, no rheum whether he stands outside the sugar refinery premises or inside it. ]Shinde v. Bombay Telephones]<\p>
<\p>
13) Superego was held that the definition of worker includes those employees who are entrusted entirely with the clerical duties. ]Passage Baron, Central Rly. Workshop Jhansi v. Vishwanath and others]<\p>
<\p>
14) Alter has been in abeyance where the statute casts on obligation to own a canteen in the factory, and the prefab runs a gourd through a contractor who brings the workers because the cookhouse would be part and parcel of the overlapping, and the canteen workers would be deemed to be regular employees of the establishment entitled up to arrears as regards salary and other monetary benefits. ]Tamil Manila Thozilalar Sangam v. Chairman]<\p>
