https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173031 Where service rules apply as "for the time being in force," the superseding amended rules govern the termination, and under the amended Rule 5 simultaneous payment of compensation was no longer a condition precedent, so the challenge based on the temporary service rules failed. The termination nevertheless amounted to retrenchment under the law then applicable because the employee had completed over 240 days' continuous service and the notice and retrenchment compensation requirements of Section 25-F were not met, rendering the termination void. Reinstatement with continuity was upheld, with only 50% back wages and consequential service benefits. en-us Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Sep 2015 16:52:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173031 Where service rules apply as "for the time being in force," the superseding amended rules govern the termination, and under the amended Rule 5 simultaneous payment of compensation was no longer a condition precedent, so the challenge based on the temporary service rules failed. The termination nevertheless amounted to retrenchment under the law then applicable because the employee had completed over 240 days' continuous service and the notice and retrenchment compensation requirements of Section 25-F were not met, rendering the termination void. Reinstatement with continuity was upheld, with only 50% back wages and consequential service benefits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173031