https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282824 A High Court direction requiring the Government of India to continue or absorb workmen was unsustainable because no master-servant relationship had been established between the Government and the workmen of the State Trading Corporation. The earlier brief order relied on by the High Court could not operate as a binding precedent since it did not disclose the facts or reasons supporting the direction. The ancillary plea based on Section 25O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 failed because no relief had been granted against the State Trading Corporation and the establishment strength was only 28 workmen, below the statutory threshold. Compensation had been offered under Section 25FFF. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2019 13:04:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282824 A High Court direction requiring the Government of India to continue or absorb workmen was unsustainable because no master-servant relationship had been established between the Government and the workmen of the State Trading Corporation. The earlier brief order relied on by the High Court could not operate as a binding precedent since it did not disclose the facts or reasons supporting the direction. The ancillary plea based on Section 25O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 failed because no relief had been granted against the State Trading Corporation and the establishment strength was only 28 workmen, below the statutory threshold. Compensation had been offered under Section 25FFF. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 19 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282824