Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.26 seconds)
National Textile Corporation ... vs S.M. Tambe And Ors. on 25 October, 1999 cites

Maharashtra State Textile Corpn. Ltd. vs Vasudev Vinayak Joshi And Another on 13 September, 1989

In the circumstances, the controversy in this matter would stand squarely covered under the observations by Mrs. sUJATA MANOHAR, J. (as she then was in this Court), in the case of Maharashtra State Textile Corporation Ltd. v. Vasudeo Vinayak Joshi, (supra) wherein in para 14 the learned Judge has, in terms, stated that "this phrase "when retrenchment becomes necessary", (appearing in Standing Order 20A) does not refer merely to the subjective satisfaction of the management regarding the need for retrenchment: nor does it refer merely to a settlement or agreement for retrenchment which may be arrived at between the management and the Representative Union. It refers to a further stage when ultimately reduction does take place in the number of workmen or the posts as the case may be. And hence it becomes necessary for the management to comply with Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act before it resorts to the provision of the last part of Standing Order 20A". In the present case, the petitioner management has not done any of these things. The aforesaid judgment of the learned single Judge has been subsequently confirmed by the Division Bench and there is no reason for me to make any exception when similar facts are squarely covered under the judgment. In the circumstances, this petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged, though with no order as to costs.
Bombay High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 5 - S V Manohar - Full Document
1   2 Next