AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 2879 ::2007 AIR SCW 5260 ::2008 (1) AIR Jhar R 575 ::2007 (6) AIR Kar R 95 ::2007 (3) CurLR 325 ::(2007) 114 FacLR 1040 ::2007 (7) SCC 366 ::(2007) 10 Scale 22 ::2007 (4) All WC 3720 ::(2007) 4 MPLJ 426 ::(2007) 6 Mah LJ 544 ::2007 (4) LabLN 199 ::(2007) 4 Ker LT 279 ::(2007) 4 JCR 76 (SC) ::(2008) 1 Raj LW 445 ::2007 (4) SCT 92 ::2007 (5) ServLR 554 ::(2007) 5 AllMR 470 (SC) ::2007 (5) Supreme 951

Supreme Court Of India

(From : 2003 (1) SCT 550 (P andH))

Hon'ble Judge(s): G. P. Mathur, P. K. Balasubramanyan , JJ

Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947) , S.25F, S.25FFF— Retrenchment - Termination of services on account of closure of one unit of appellant-Society - Would not amount to retrenchment merely because other units of appellant were functioning and not closed down - Not illegal, for non-compliance of provisions of S. 25F - Employee entitled to compensation only in accordance with S. 25FFF. 2003 (1) SCT 550 (P andH), Reversed. If the entire establishment of the employer is not closed down but only a unit or undertaking is closed down which has no functional integrity with other units or undertaking, the provisions of S. 25FFF will get attracted and the workmen are only entitled to compensation as provided in S. 25FFF, which has to be calculated in accordance with S. 25F. In the instant case the termination of services of employee- nurse on account of closure of its maternity hospital, one of the units of the appellant-Society, would not amount to retrenchment on ground that other units of the appellant-Society like Drug De-Addiction-cum-Rehabilitation Centre, Family Planning Centre and Viklang Kendra were functioning. The Maternity Hospital was functioning as a distinct entity. It was not receiving any grant from the Govt. and was being run entirely on charitable basis from donations received from public. Due to financial stringency, the Maternity ....