https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295958 Retrenchment based on alleged closure or rationalisation was unlawful where the employer failed to prove bona fide closure and did not comply with mandatory statutory safeguards, including proper notice, notice to the Government, and notice of intended closure. The employer also could not justify departing from the last come first go principle or the requirement to display the seniority list, so the deviation was treated as unfair labour practice. The termination was therefore ineffective, and reinstatement with consequential monetary reliefs was sustained. en-us Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jun 2021 10:01:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295958 Retrenchment based on alleged closure or rationalisation was unlawful where the employer failed to prove bona fide closure and did not comply with mandatory statutory safeguards, including proper notice, notice to the Government, and notice of intended closure. The employer also could not justify departing from the last come first go principle or the requirement to display the seniority list, so the deviation was treated as unfair labour practice. The termination was therefore ineffective, and reinstatement with consequential monetary reliefs was sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295958