H.U.D.A. vs OM PAL

The Supreme Court held that the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court erred in directing reinstatement of the respondent under Section 25F and Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as the two Sub-Divisions where the respondent worked were distinct establishments. The Court emphasized that continuity of service cannot be claimed when the employee was appointed separately in different establishments without any transfer. The appeal was allowed, overturning the Tribunal's award for reinstatement and back-wages.