Disposed

S.Ramesh v. The Presiding Officer

Madras HC11 Jul 2024WP/6968/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross writ petitions by a dismissed workman and the management against a Labour Court award were disposed of on a memorandum of settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act: cessation of employment accepted and Rs.2 Lakhs compensation paid, besides Rs.2 Lakhs already deposited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed per settlement; Labour Court award quashed; workman to receive Rs.2 lakhs compensation and withdraw Rs.2 lakhs deposit with interest.

S.Ramesh Vs The Presiding Officer — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 11.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

¶6

W.P.Nos.6968 & 15434 of 2015 &

¶7

M.P. Nos. 1 & 1 of 2015

¶8

W.P.No.6968 of 2015:

S.Ramesh

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Cuddalore.

¶13

2.The Management of Arkema Peroxides India Private Limited Represented by the Assistant Vice – President (Establishments) Semmankuppam Village, Cuddalore. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondents relating to the award passed by the 1^st respondent dated 27.08.2014 in I.D.No.37 of 2012 and quash the same in so far as it upholds the

¶15

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

¶16

1/7

¶17

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶18

dismissal of the petitioner from the service of the 2^nd respondent company on 10.08.2012 and orders payment of compensation of Rs.4 Lakhs to the petitioner and further direct the 2^nd respondent management to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service, full back wages and all consequent and attendant benefits.

¶19

For Petitioner : M/s. Ramapriya Gopalakrishnan For Respondent 1: Court For Respondent 2 : Mr. P.Raghunathan for M/s. T.S.Goplan & Co.

¶20

W.P.No.15434 of 2015:

¶21

The Management of Arkema Peroxides India Private Limited Represented by the Assistant Vice – President (Works) Semmankuppam Village, Cuddalore. ...Petitioner Vs.

¶22

The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Cuddalore.

¶23

S.Ramesh ...Respondents

¶24

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of

¶25

2/7

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶28

Certiorari to call for the records of the 1^st respondent dated 27.08.2014 in I.D.No.37 of 2012 and quash the same.

¶29

For Petitioner : Mr. P.Raghunathan for M/s. T.S.Goplan & Co. For Respondent 1: Court For Respondent 2 : M/s. Ramapriya Gopalakrishnan

¶30

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶31

Today, the parties have filed a memorandum of settlement which

¶32

has been reached under Section 18 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

¶33

1947, whereunder the following terms have been arrived:

¶34

(i)Mr. S.Ramesh, hereby, accepts his cessation of employment as on 10.08.2012.

¶35

(ii) In consideration of Clause 1 above, purely as a gesture of goodwill to an erstwhile employee, the Company has agreed to pay Mr.S.Ramesh and he agreed to receive the sum of Rs 2 Lakhs as and by way of compensation in full and final settlement of all his claims

¶36

3/7

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶39

including whatever subsisting claims he may have including gratuity.

¶40

(iii)On payment of the above amount, Mr.S.Ramesh

¶41

will have no further claim against the Management and/or

¶42

any company of Arkema group.

¶43

Mr.S.Ramesh is permitted to withdraw the deposit of Rs.2 Lakhs with interest which is now lying with Labour Court, Cuddalore to the credit of ID No.37 of 2012.

¶44

(v)With this settlement neither party shall have any claim against the other.

¶45

(vi)The parties agree to file this settlement in the High Court and seek the disposal of 2 Writ Petitions on the basis of the settlement in replacement of the award of the Labour Court.

¶46

Pursuant to the above terms, the 2^nd respondent in W.P.No.15434 of 2015 has received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Cheque

¶47

4/7

¶48

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

¶49

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶50

No.991181 dated 08.07.2024 drawn at Citibank) as full and final settlement of all his claims apart from the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- already in deposit to the credit of I.D.No.37 of 2012 on the file of the Labour Court, Cuddalore. The Labour Court, Cuddalore shall on petition being made by the 2^nd respondent in W.P.No.15434 of 2015 seeking payment out of Rs.2,00,000/- lying in deposit to the credit of I.D.No.37 of 2012 order payment to him.

¶51

The memorandum of settlement is taken on file and the Writ Petitions are disposed of on the terms therein. The award of the 1^st respondent in I.D.No.37 of 2012 dated 27.08.2014 is quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

¶52

11.07.2024

¶53

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No kan

¶54

5/7

¶55

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

¶56

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶57

¶58

The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Cuddalore.

¶59

P.T. ASHA, J,

¶60

kan

¶61

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

¶62

6/7

¶63

W.P.No.6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶64

W.P.Nos. 6968 & 15434 of 2015

¶65

11.07.2024

¶66

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

¶67

7/7

S.Ramesh v. The Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ramesh 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

T.Kuttalam Pillai Vs The Director

N.Satish Ambedkar Vs Director of Public Health &

K. Kanakesan, Vs The Collector

P.Leelakrishnan Vs The District Collector

M.Marthanda Boopathy, Vs The Director of Fire & Rescue

S.Rajendran Vs The State of Tamilnadu