Disposed

The Management of Rkkr Steels v. the Presiding Officer

Madras HC21 Dec 2020WP/25422/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging an Industrial Disputes Act order. Counsel confirmed for both sides that full settlement was made pursuant to the impugned order, rendering no issue pending for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of; no costs awarded; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

The Management of Rkkr Steels Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Date : 21.12.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.25422 of 2003 and W.P.M.P.No.31228 of 2003 and W.V.M.P.No.1384 of 2004

¶6

The Management of RKKR Steels Ltd., 403, T.H.Road, Chennai - 600 019. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Presiding Officer, First Addl. Labour Court, Chennai. 2.A.C.Varghese 3.T.D.Mani (Deceased) 4.M.Kuppuswamy 5.R.Durai 6.D.Ramadoss 7.K.Gunalan 8.Susheela, W/o.Late T.D.Mani 9.Kuppulakshmi, S/o.Late T.D.Mani ... Respondents (8th and 9th respondents are the legal heirs of deceased 3rd respondent)

¶7

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to C.P. No.443 of 1987 including the order of the first respondent dated 29.08.2002 and quash the same.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kalyanaraman For 1st Respondent : Court For RR 2, 4, 8 & 9 : Mr.Jaikumar

¶9

ORDER

¶10

The prayer sought for in this writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to C.P. No.443 of 1987 including the order of the first respondent dated 29.08.2002 and quash the same.

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

2.Against the order passed by the Labour Court under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in Claim Petition No.443 of 1987 on the file of the I Additional Labour Court, Chennai dated 29.08.2002, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner management.

¶13

3.Today when the case is taken up for hearing, Mr.V.Kalyanaraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner management, on instruction, would submit that, during the pendency of the writ petition, as per the order passed by the Labour Court in the order impugned herein, the amount payable to all the respondents employees had been fully settled and they have received the same, therefore, nothing survives in this writ petition, hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court that, by recording the said statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition may be disposed of.

¶14

4.Mr.Jaikumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents workmen also endorsed the said stand taken up by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner management.

¶15

5.In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon a memo filed, where, they have given the details of payment made to these respondents employees and the statement given therein in the memo has not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents workmen.

¶16

6.In view of the same, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following order:

¶17

The said statement that the full and final settlement had been made in respect of all the respondents workmen, pursuant to the order passed by the Labour Court, which is impugned herein is hereby recorded. As no further issue is pending before this Court for adjudication in this writ petition, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶18

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

Sgl

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

¶26

The Presiding Officer, First Addl. Labour Court, Chennai.

¶27

W.P.No.25422 of 2003

¶28

PP(CO) GN(19/01/2021)

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The Management of Rkkr Steels v. the Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Management of Rkkr Steels v. the Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pr.Palaniappan Vs C.T.C.Nachiappa Chettiar

State of Tamilnadu Vs the Tamilnadu Information

Vanitha Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Our Lady of Fatima Nursery and Primary School Vs E.S.I.Regional Corporation

P.Muniyandi Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

C.Kumaravel Vs the Management