https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199890 Section 25-M of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, requiring prior permission for lay-off in specified industrial establishments, was upheld as a reasonable restriction on the employer's right to carry on business under Article 19. The Court distinguished the earlier invalidation of Section 25-O and noted that the lay-off scheme contained procedural and substantive safeguards, including recorded reasons, a time-bound decision, deemed permission on non-communication, and objective scrutiny by the prescribed authority. It also recognised the provision's role in promoting industrial peace, protecting workmen from arbitrary lay-off, and advancing Directive Principles, while exempting power failure and natural calamity cases. The constitutional challenge therefore failed. en-us Thu, 08 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:50:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199890 Section 25-M of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, requiring prior permission for lay-off in specified industrial establishments, was upheld as a reasonable restriction on the employer's right to carry on business under Article 19. The Court distinguished the earlier invalidation of Section 25-O and noted that the lay-off scheme contained procedural and substantive safeguards, including recorded reasons, a time-bound decision, deemed permission on non-communication, and objective scrutiny by the prescribed authority. It also recognised the provision's role in promoting industrial peace, protecting workmen from arbitrary lay-off, and advancing Directive Principles, while exempting power failure and natural calamity cases. The constitutional challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199890