Disposed

The Management v. Velmurugan

Madras HC9 Dec 2023WP/12336/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a settlement before the High Court Legal Services Committee in Chennai, the petitioner agreed to reinstate the first respondent as a fresh entrant, and the first respondent agreed to forego back wages. The petition for quashing was disposed of based on the joint compromise.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; Petitioner to reinstate first respondent as fresh entrant; First respondent to forego back wages.

The Management Vs Velmurugan — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, CHENNAI National Lok Adalat organised by the High Court Legal Services Committee Saturday the 09^th day of December 2023

¶3

NATIONAL LOK ADALAT AWARD

¶4

(Chapter VI and u/s 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987)

¶5

Presided over by

¶6

The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶7

and

¶8

Members :

¶9

1.Mr.K.Ramakrishnan, District Judge (Retd.) 2.Mr.K.Ethirajalu, Advocate

¶10

W.P.No.12336 of 2023

¶11

Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 25.08.2022 passed by the second Respondent in approval petition No.7 of 2019 and quash the same, consequently direct the second Respondent to approve the order of the Petitioner dated 31.01.2016, dismissing the first Respondent from service.

¶12

The Management,

¶13

Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Ltd., Pallavan Illam, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.Velmurugan

2.The Special Joint Commissioner of Labour DMS Campus, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶18

... Respondent

¶19

With the consent of both the parties, this case is taken up for settlement before this Lok Adalat. Both the parties are present Mr.R.Balaji, learned counsel for Petitioner and Mr.Velmurugan, first respondent are present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between both https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis parties, they arrived at a compromise to settle the matter as follows:

¶20

¶21

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

¶22

Both the parties have agreed to settle the issue and filed a joint memo

¶23

duly signed by both the parties dated 09.12.2023, wherein it is stated as follows:

¶24

“It is submitted that the 1^st Respondent workman agrees to forego the entire backwages and continuity of service from the date of removal i.e., 31.01.2019 to till the date of reinstatement. Further, the Petitioner/Corporation have agreed to reinstate the 1^st Respondent as fresh entrant into service.”

¶25

2.The Petitioner agreed to comply with the terms of the compromise

¶26

within a period of three months. In terms of the above joint memo dated 09.12.2023, the Writ Petition is disposed of and the said joint memo shall form part of this order.

¶27

The Management Metropolitan Transport Corporation Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002

¶28

Counsel for Petitioner

¶29

1.Velmurugan (Party in person)

¶30

2.The Special Joint Commissioner of Labour DMS Campus, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶31

This Lok Adalat award is passed in terms of the above settlement.

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

¶34

The full Court fee paid shall be refunded to the Petitioner in the manner provided under Section 69-A of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and the Court Fees Act, 1870 as provided for under sub Sec.1 of Section 21 r/w 25 of LSA Act 1987 as amended in 1994.

Judge

Member

Member

To: The parties/Advocate concerned

¶39

Copy to:

¶40

1.The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Chennai.

¶41

2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.

¶42

3.The Section Officer, Lok Adalat Section, High Court, Madras.+2 copies

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

at/sai

W.P.No.12336 of 2023

¶48

09.12.2023

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The Management v. Velmurugan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Management v. Velmurugan

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

Rajambal Vs Sakunthala

Mrs.K.Chellammal Vs Mrs.Shasi N.Ahuja

Annapoorani Vs Mohanambal

The Management Vs The Special Joint commissioner of Labour

The Management Vs S.Kamalavel

M.Mayakrishnan( Died) Vs the Managing Director