Isha Steel Treatment, Bombay vs Association Of Engineering Workers, ... on 25 February, 1987
In the matter of Isha Steel Treatment, Bombay v. Association of Engineering Workers, Bombay & Anr., reported in AIR 1987 SC 1478, it has been held that, 'a firm carrying on the business of metal processing i.e., heat treatment of metals, had two factories. Both the factories were situate only about 200 yards away from each other. Both the units had independent location, separate factory licences and separate municipal licences. The two units also had separate stores and maintained separate accounts and balance-sheets. On finding that the workman of one of the unit were wilfully slacking their work and that there was growing indiscipline amongst them, the firm decided to close down the unit. Closure compensation was offered to the entire staff of the unit. Industrial dispute was raised by the workmen who claimed that Section 25G was attracted as the two units had functional integrality and were for all purposes one establishment; case of bona fide closure of an independent unit of business
to which Section 25G had no application from the fact that the two units were situate at a distance of 200 meters from each other, the fact that both the units were controlled by the same employer and that the business of heat treatment processing carried on in the two units was identical, it could not be said that the two units were really integral'.