INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947
S.25-F--Retrenchment--Workman had worked for a period of more than 240 days within 12 calendar months preceding the date of termination, and in view of non-compliance of Section 25F of the Act, he was entitled to reinstatement--Instead of regularization of services, the appellant’s services as Mali terminated without notice or retrenchment compensation--Appellant made reference before Labour Court--Labour Court concluded that the workman worked for a period of more than 240 days preceding the date of termination, thus directed reinstatement--High Court set aside the award of the Labour Court--Appeal--Appellant worked for 3 years without break during his service tenure--No reason given for his termination--Termination in contravention of the provisions of Section 25-F--High Court ought not to have interfered with the factual finding rendered by the Labour Court--Impugned order of the High Court set aside and that of the Labour Court restored.; Ramesh Kumar v. State of Haryana,: 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 487 (SC)