

Section 2(g) of the Act states that “standing orders” are the rules relating to matters set out in the Schedule, i.e. with reference to:

S.K. Sheshadri v H.A.L and others, (1983) :
In this case, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held that, as long as the Standing Orders fall within the Schedule to the Act, irrespective of the fact that they contain additional provisions which are not accounted for in the MSOs, the Standing Orders would not be deemed to be invalid or ultra vires of the Act. The MSOs only serve as a model for framing the Standing Orders.
Hindustan Lever v Workmen, (1974)
In the present case, the issue relating to the ‘transfer of workmen’ was highlighted by concurring that, the Manager is vested with the discretion of transfer of workmen amongst different departments of the same company, so far as the terms of the contract of employment are not affected. Further, if the transfer is found to be valid, the onus of proving it to be invalid lies on the workmen in dispute.
In the matter of: Rohtak & Hisar District Supply Co. Ltd. V/s State of U.P., AIR 1966
It was held that:
According to Section 6 of the ISO,
Management, Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Co. Ltd. V/s S.S. Railway Workers’ Union, AIR 1969 ,
it was held that: An application for modification of standing orders would ordinarily be made in the following cases:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
© VIDHOON All Rights Reserved