https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220697 Daily-wage workmen whose services were terminated without compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act were held not entitled to automatic reinstatement merely because they had worked for more than 240 days. The Court reiterated that, especially for daily wagers who do not hold a regular post, violation of retrenchment procedure does not necessarily require reinstatement, and monetary compensation may better serve the ends of justice. On the facts noted, reinstatement was set aside and compensation was treated as the proper relief. en-us Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220697 Daily-wage workmen whose services were terminated without compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act were held not entitled to automatic reinstatement merely because they had worked for more than 240 days. The Court reiterated that, especially for daily wagers who do not hold a regular post, violation of retrenchment procedure does not necessarily require reinstatement, and monetary compensation may better serve the ends of justice. On the facts noted, reinstatement was set aside and compensation was treated as the proper relief. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220697