Allowed

M/s.Raasiga Leathers v. M.Kuppusamy

Madras HC8 Jul 2021WP/21352/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash a Labour Court award and related orders. The Court allowed the petition on the condition that the amount deposited pursuant to an interim order be released to the petitioner management, as the full settlement had already been paid. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

What did the court decide?

Release of deposited amount with interest to the petitioner; impugned award and orders effectively quashed due to settlement.

M/s.Raasiga Leathers Vs M.Kuppusamy — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.07.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶5

W.P.NO.21352 OF 2015

¶6

M/s.Rassiga Leathers rep. By its Manager, Mr.A.K.Z.Riyazus Salheen, No.701-1A, M.B.T. Road Cross, Ranipet, Vellore District. ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs. 1. M.Kuppusamy

¶8

The Presiding Officer, Principal Labour Court, Vellore, Vellore District. ... Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned Award passed by the 2^nd Respondent made in I.D.No.254 of 2004, dated 30.01.2010 and the consequential impugned order dated 16.12.2010 made in Computation Petition No.82 of 2010 by the 2^nd Respondent and the impugned order dated 06.01.2014 made in Computation Petition No.51 of 2013 by the 2^nd Respondent, and quash the same.

¶10

Petitioner/Management has come up with this Writ Petition seeking to quash the impugned Award dated 30.01.2010 passed by the 2^nd Respondent made in I.D.No.254 of 2004, and the consequential impugned order dated 16.12.2010 made in Computation Petition No.82 of 2010 by the 2^nd Respondent, and the impugned order dated 06.01.2014 made in Computation Petition No.51 of 2013 by the 2^nd Respondent.

¶11

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

¶12

It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st Respondent/workman that, a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- as full and final settlement has already been paid in favour of the 1^st Respondent/workman.

¶13

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material documents available on record.

¶14

As the Petitioner/Management has paid the entire amount due to the 1^st Respondent/workman, this Court makes it clear that, any amount lying in deposit pursuant to the interim order of this Court, can be withdrawn by the Petitioner/Management together with accrued interest, and the Labour Court shall release the amount within a period of fifteen days from the date of production of a copy of this order, without waiting for 'No Objection' endorsement either from the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st Respondent or from the 1^st Respondent/workman.

¶15

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.No.2 of 2015 is closed.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar (aeb) To:

¶17

The Presiding Officer, Principal Labour Court, Vellore, Vellore District.

¶18

+1cc to Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu, Advocate, S.R.No.32117

¶19

W.P.No.21352 of 2015

¶20

SRA(CO) CS/13/07/2021

¶21

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

M/s.Raasiga Leathers v. M.Kuppusamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Raasiga Leathers v. M.Kuppusamy

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

M/S Gtv Spinners Ltd. Vs Deputy Director Employees

Tamilnadu State Transport Vs the President Officer

St.Josephs matriculation Vs the Government of

The Management Vs R.Pappaiayan (Died)

Balmer Lawrie Employees Vs Balmer Lawrie Company Limited

The Management, Vs Ms.Sasireka