<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (5) TMI 344 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111184</link>
    <description>Sanctioned and substantially implemented rehabilitation schemes for sick industrial companies, including amalgamation and retrenchment measures, receive substantial judicial deference. BIFR and AAIFR determinations carry weight as specialised statutory decisions, and courts ordinarily will not reappreciate technical or policy choices in the rehabilitation process unless procedural irregularity, constitutional infirmity, or abuse of power is demonstrated. Once the company has been discharged from the rehabilitation regime, challenges to related Labour Court and Industrial Court orders may not warrant interference where the scheme governs the underlying employment measures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:38:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 344 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111184</link>
      <description>Sanctioned and substantially implemented rehabilitation schemes for sick industrial companies, including amalgamation and retrenchment measures, receive substantial judicial deference. BIFR and AAIFR determinations carry weight as specialised statutory decisions, and courts ordinarily will not reappreciate technical or policy choices in the rehabilitation process unless procedural irregularity, constitutional infirmity, or abuse of power is demonstrated. Once the company has been discharged from the rehabilitation regime, challenges to related Labour Court and Industrial Court orders may not warrant interference where the scheme governs the underlying employment measures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111184</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>