Disposed

M.R.Palanichamy v. The Presiding Officer

Madras HC15 Feb 2021WP/36812/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Weavers filed opposing writ petitions challenging a Labour Court award and the Management filed a petition to quash the same. Upon receipt of a valid Memorandum of Settlement signed by both parties and attested under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Court disposed of the petitions in accordance with the settlement terms, effectively replacing the earlier award. No costs were award

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petitions were disposed off in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 30.12.2020, which became part of the court records. No costs awarded.

M.R.Palanichamy Vs The Presiding Officer — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 15.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶5

WP NOS.36812 OF 2016 AND 6404 OF 2017

¶6

AND WMP NO.6909 OF 2017

¶7

W.P.NO.36812 OF 2016
M.R.Palanichamy ... Petitioner
Versus
1.The Presiding Officer
Labour Court,
Salem.
2.The Management
M/s.Sakthi Sugars Limited
Sakthi Nagar,
Erode District – 638 315. ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1^st respondent in I.D.No.562/2000 and quash the award dated 17.12.2012 and further direct the 2^nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service, backwages and all other attendant benefits.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.V.Shanmuganathan

¶10

For Respondent-2 : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Copalan & Co.,

¶11

W.P.NO.6404 OF 2017

¶12

The Management of M/s.Sakthi Sugars Limited Sakthi Nagar – 638 315. Erode District. Rep. by Sr.Vice President – HRD ... Petitioner

¶13

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

¶14

Versus

¶15

1.The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Salem.

¶16

2.M.R.Palanichamy .. Respondents

¶17

PRAYER: 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 1^st respondent in I.D.No.562 of 2000 and quash the award dated 17.12.2012.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Copalan & Co., For Respondent-2 : Mr.K.V.Shanmuganathan COMMON ORDER The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.6404 of 2017 and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.36812 of 2016 have filed Memorandum of Settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, dated 30.12.2020, duly signed by the workman and the Management and duly attested by witnesses, which reads as under:

¶19

“MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT REACHED UNDER SECTION 18(1) OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT

¶20

Parties to the Settlement Management of Sakthi Sugars Limited Sakthinagar, Bhavani TK Erode District – 638315. HO: 180 Race Course Road Coimbatore – 641 018. AND M.R.Palanisamy Workman Representing Management Represented by its Representing Workman M.R.Palanisamy Total No. of Workman 1 workman only SHORT RECITAL

¶21

Thiru M R Palanisamy who was an employee of Sakthi Sugars Limited, Sakthinagar, Erode District, having Head Office at 180, Race

¶22

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

¶23

Course Road, Coimbatore District, was dismissed for certain acts of misconduct in the year 2000. He raised an Industrial Dispute challenging the order of dismissal. The dispute was taken up before the Labour Court, Salem in ID No.562 of 2000. The Labour Court, Salem by its award dated 17.12.2012 directed the Management to pay a compensation of Rs.3,49,600/- to the workman instead of reinstatement. The Management on receipt of the award had sent a Demand Draft for the said amount. However, the workman refused to receive the same. After a lapse of nearly 3 years, the workman filed Writ Petition No.36812 of 2016 challenging the award and the Management also aggrieved by the said award filed Writ Petition No.6404 of 2017. On 05.06.2016, the workman M R Palanisamy attained the age of superannuation. In these circumstances, he approached the Management for an out of court settlement. Accordingly, both parties had negotiations and have arrived at a settlement on the following terms and conditions:

¶24

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

¶25

Workman Thiru M R Palanisamy hereby accepts the order of dismissal dated 18.04.2000.

¶26

Workman Thiru M R Palanisamy agrees not to press the dispute raised by him before the Labour Court, Salem, in ID No.562 of 2000 and the award dated 17.12.2012 in ID No.562 of 2000.

¶27

The Management on humanitarian ground, without setting any precedent given that the order of dismissal is accepted by the workman has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/-.

¶28

Workman Thiru M R Palanisamy hereby agrees to receive the sum of Rs.7,00,000/subject to tax deducted at source as full and final settlement of all his statutory and contractual monetary dues.

¶29

The Management agrees to pay the sum of Rs.7,00,000/- after deduction of tax by a Cheque No.573662 dated 30.12.2020 drawn on Canara Bank as Full and Final Settlement.

¶30

Workman Thiru M R Palanisamy acknowledges receipt of the same.

¶31

Workman Thiru M R Palanisamy further agrees and affirms that upon receipt of

¶32

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

¶33

the above referred payment, he shall have no claim against the management whatsoever for any amounts for the period he was in service either statutory or contractual or for employment or any other claim against the management whatsoever.

¶34

Both parties agree to file a copy of this settlement before the Hon'ble High Court in WP Nos.36812 of 2016 and 6404 of 2017 and shall pray that the Writ Petitions be disposed off in terms of this Settlement and that this settlement shall replace the award of the Labour Court, Salem, in ID No.562 of 2000.

¶35

With this settlement, neither party shall have any claim against the other statutorily, contractually or otherwise including employment and re-employment. Dated at Erode this the 30^th day of December 2020. “

¶36

The Memorandum of Settlement dated 30.12.2020 filed by the parties under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is taken on record and the Writ Petitions are ordered in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement. The Memorandum of Settlement shall form part and parcel of the records. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶37

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
TK
To
The Presiding Officer,
Labour Court,
Salem.

¶38

+1cc to M/s.T.S.Gopal & Co, Advocate Sr.8708

¶39

WP NOS.36812 OF 2016 & 6404 OF 2017 ak I[co] srg 03/03/2021

¶40

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

M.R.Palanichamy v. The Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.R.Palanichamy 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

S.Umakanthan Vs Union of India

M.Sudhakaran Vs Regional Provident Fund

The Management of Chemplast Vs the Presiding Officer

N.Sekar Vs Union of India

Jotheeswari v. Vs Ms. Sudha Devi I.a.S..

Then Indiya Tharaivazhi Vs T Prabhakar Rao IAS