- Login | Register
- Current Issue
- Most Read
- Back Issues
A forum of IT workers is all set to get itself registered as the first union of techies in the country, amid reports of la
After Chennai and Hyderabad, IT workers' union FITE has now decided to approach the labour commission in Bengaluru t
Budget carrier IndiGo has allegedly made attempts to poach pilots and technical staff from airlines operating ATR aircraft
The government today said IT industry has assured it that there will be no large scale job losses in the technology sector
Executive search firm Head Hunters India today said the job cuts in IT sector will be between 1.75 lakh and 2 lakh annuall
IT services firm Cognizant is extending a "voluntary separation incentive", offering up to nine months of salary, to some
E-commerce giant Amazon continues to aggressively expand its operations in the country with the addition of seven new ware
IT firm Infosys will hire 10,000 Americans in the next two years and open four centres in the US in a bid to woo the Trump
Uttar Pradesh Health Minister has proposed a new way to recruit doctors in the state. The minister seeks to do away with t
Indian IT major Infosys will hire about 10,000 locals in the US over the next two years and set up four technology and inn
P. Sainath in the Hindu
In a complex and layered verdict driven by many factors, one factor seems clear: most governments that stressed welfarist measures — particularly cheap rice and employment — gained in last month’s election results. This was regardless of which party was leading them — the Congress, the BJP, the BJD, the DMK or any other. Some of these measures might not have led to large numbers of people going out to vote for those governments. But they at least lowered hostility levels amongst the voters in a hungry nation. As Madhura Swaminathan points out, the FAO data confirm that “no country comes close to India in terms of the absolute number of people living in chronic hunger.”
Am really kicking myself that it did not occur to me to check who had decided a moustache case that had provided much mirth in our office.
And to think that it was decided, or at least reported, just a day after the controversial beard case, by the same SC bench with presumably the same Justice Katju acting as the spokesperson.
Totally escaped me. Here it is. At least, the judges are consistent in their rulings:
"If it is your family custom, keep it within the family. But when you have joined an organisation you have to to follow ," a bench of Justices RV Raveendran and Markandeya Katju quipped, dismissing Victor De's petition challenging his termination by the public sector airlines authorities.
...The apex court rejected counsel Sanjiv Sen's argument that Victor De cannot be discriminated against by the national carrier as the operation manuals of the Aircraft Act 1953 permitted the members of the Sikh community to sport beards and moustache.
"For the Sikhs sporting a moustache or beard is an indispensable part of his religion. But not for you," the bench observed.
The bench said that the airline has every right to insist that the flight crew follow certain etiquette and dress code for presenting a smart appearance before the passengers in the aircraft.
According to the apex court, even hostesses are not permitted to leave open their plait lest hair find their way into the food and beverages served to passengers. "There is nothing wrong in such rules otherwise some hair might even fall on the food served to the passengers," the bench said.
The apex court also said sporting a long moustache could intimidate children travelling in the aircraft. "There is also a feeling of children being apprehensive of the person," the apex court said.
See here: A Moustache Can Cost You Your Job