Search Results for "Retrenchment compensation"

255 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 255 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Dismisses Petition of Driver Challenging Termination — Upholds Labour Court's Finding That Employee Did Not Complete 240 Days of Service. Termination for Absence After Accident Not Retrenchment Under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The petitioner, Mangabhai Noghbhai Algotar, was employed as a driver with the respondents, BRTS City Link, Surat Municipal Corporation, from 16.12.201...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Reinstatement and Regularization of Retrenched Casual Workers in Food Corporation of India — Retrenchment Void Under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Back wages restricted to 75% due to long gap in service.

The case involves an industrial dispute raised by the Executive Staff Union of Food Corporation of India on behalf of 21 casual workers who were retre...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Pension Benefits for Temporary Employee in Agricultural University Service Matter — Half of Temporary Service Counted Towards Pension as Per Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982.

The petitioner, Vithal Tukaram Londhe, joined the Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krushi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, as a temporary labourer on 24.04.1997. He wor...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions of Retrenched Daily Wagers Challenging Termination Without Compliance with Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act. Appointments for 11-month periods without indicating temporary nature deemed regular, termination illegal.

The petitioners, Arun Rambhau Phatak and Sarjirao Mahadeo Bhalerao, were working as Helpers to Cooks on a daily wage basis from 1984 to 2001 at Mahatm...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Labour Court Order Setting Aside Retrenchment as Unfair Labour Practice. Employer Failed to Prove Genuine Closure, Retrenchment of 23 Workmen Without Complying with Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Held Illegal.

The petitioner, M/s. Sanket Food Products Pvt. Ltd., challenged the judgments of the Labour Court and Industrial Court which held that the retrenchmen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Industrial Court's Order Holding Retrenchment as Unfair Labour Practice. Non-compliance with Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act renders retrenchment illegal and amounts to unfair labour practice under Item 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act.

The petitioner, Shekoba Auto Private Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, was engaged in the manufacture of automobile ignition...