Closure alone does not end employment; provident fund insurance benefits continue absent compliance with closure and retrenchment requirements.

Mere closure of a textile undertaking does not by itself terminate employment or end provident fund membership. Termination on closure arises only when the statutory closure and retrenchment requirements under the Industrial Disputes Act are complied with, including the prescribed notice and compensation regime. Because no such compliance was shown, the workmen were treated as remaining employees on the dates of their deaths, so their dependents retained entitlement to deposit-linked insurance benefits under the provident fund scheme. The court accordingly directed release of the insurance benefits with interest.

---

---

Issues: Whether the closure of the textile mills, without compliance with the closure and retrenchment requirements under the Industrial Disputes Act, terminated the services of the workmen so as to deprive their dependents of deposit-linked insurance benefits under the provident fund scheme.

Analysis: Membership of the provident fund did not cease merely because the mills had closed. A mere stopping of work or closure of business does not automatically terminate the services of employees. Termination on closure follows only when the statutory requirements relating to closure are complied with, including the notice and compensation provisions applicable to retrenchment on closure. The standing orders and the Bombay Industrial Relations Act regulate the procedure for closure, but the consequence of termination is governed by the Industrial Disputes Act. Since there was no compliance with the relevant statutory requirements, the workmen were not shown to have ceased to be employees on the dates of death.

Conclusion: The workmen remained members of the fund on the dates of their deaths, and their dependents were entitled to the insurance benefit.

Final Conclusion: The petition was allowed, and the respondent was directed to release the insurance benefits with interest.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere closure of an undertaking does not by itself terminate employment; termination on closure arises only upon compliance with the statutory closure and retrenchment regime.

---