Dismissed¶69

R.ravichandran v. the Secretary

Madras HC10 Jun 2025WP/1049/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 25(O) Industrial Disputes Act closure; Anglo French Textiles / Pondicherry Textile Corporation; deemed permission 60 days expired 06.04.2020; Form QA Column 24 VRS or Settlement; terminal benefits Rs.10,92,682 acceptance bars closure challenge; Article 226 writ of declaration; Madras HC 2025 P. Dhanabal J.; Swadeshi Panchalai Thozilalar Urimai Padukappu Sangam W.P.Nos.5360 & 5365 of 2021 applied.

What did the court decide?

The statutory procedure under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act was followed by the Government: the Enquiry Authority was appointed, his report recommending closure was approved, and the deemed period of 60 days expired on 06.04.2020; hence there was no procedural violation and the closure taking effect from 30.04.2020 is not illegal. ¶51

R.ravichandran Vs the Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶69

Issue for consideration

Whether the closure of the third respondent Mill with effect from 30.04.2020 pursuant to Form QA dated 21.01.2020 issued under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is illegal owing to procedural violations, including the alleged absence of an enquiry report to the Government and of a closure order/permission communicated under Section 25(O). +1 more

¶47

Court's answer

¶51

Ratio / Principle

Having received the entire terminal benefits of Rs.10,92,682/- (including pending wages for 2019-2020 and 2012-2013) and accepted them, the petitioner cannot raise objection to the closure of the Mill.

¶51

Key takeaways

Consistently with this Court's earlier decision in W.P.Nos.5360 & 5365 of 2021 (Swadeshi Panchalai Thozilalar Urimai Padukappu Sangam), a workman who has already accepted monetary benefits is not entitled to relief; the petitioner accepted the benefits on 09.08.2021 and filed this writ petition only on 03.01.2022, and is therefore not entitled to any relief.ratio¶68

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P. Dhanabal, J.), W.P.No.1049 of 2022, decided 10.06.2025: Writ petition under Article 226 by R.Ravichandran, a Fitter at Anglo French Textiles (Puducherry), seeking declaration that the Mill's closure with effect from 30.04.2020, pursuant to Form QA dated 21.01.2020 issued under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was illegal for procedural violations (no enquiry report furnished; no closure order/permission communicated). Held: the statutory procedure was followed — D.Ramabathiran, District Judge (Retired), was appointed Enquiry Authority by G.O. dated 02.03.2020 (No.553/AIL/LAB/T/2020), his report recommending closure was approved by the Government, and the 60-day deemed period under Section 25(O)(3) expired on 06.04.2020; further, the petitioner received and accepted the entire terminal benefits of Rs.10,92,682/- (including pending wages 2019-20 and 2012-13), acknowledged by stamp receipt, and having accepted the benefits on 09.08.2021 before filing on 03.01.2022 cannot challenge the closure — consistent with the Court's decision in Swadeshi Panchalai Thozilalar Urimai Padukappu Sangam (W.P.Nos.5360 & 5365 of 2021). Writ petition dismissed; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 10.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶6

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶7

R.Ravichandran ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Secretary, Industries and Commerce, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶10

2.The Secretary (Labour), Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶11

3.The Managing Director, Anglo French Textiles, A unit of Pondicherry Textile Corporation Ltd., Cuddalore Road, Mudaliarpet, Puducherry – 605 004. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Declaration, declaring the closure of the third respondent Mill with effect from 30.04.2020 pursuant to Form QA dated 21.01.2020 issued by the third respondent under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as illegal and pass such further orders.

¶13

1/10

¶14

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

¶15

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.Anil Relwani For Respondents : Mr.A.Tamilvanan, Additional Government Pleader (Pondy)

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This writ petition is filed to declare the closure of the third

¶19

respondent Mill with effect from 30.04.2020 pursuant to Form QA dated 21.01.2020 issued by the third respondent under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as illegal.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that

¶21

the petitioner was working as a Fitter in the third respondent's Mill and joined the duty on 01.04.1992 and the date of retirement is on 06.06.2030. While so, the third respondent served upon all the trade unions a notice dated 21.01.2020 under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, thereby indicating that the third respondent proposed to close down the third respondent Mill with effect from 30.04.2020. In the notice, Form 'QA'

¶22

was also annexed, and Column 24 of Form 'QA' indicates that the Government of Puducherry has decided to propose 'VRS or Settlement'.

¶23

2/10

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶26

Immediately, the petitioner, along with other workmen, approached the office of the third respondent, and they requested the workmen not to approach the Tribunal or challenge the closure since all the interests of the workmen would be taken care of by the third respondent. The petitioner did not opt for the VRS scheme and requested the office of the third respondent to invite the petitioner and other similarly placed workmen for mutual

¶27

'Settlement'.

¶28

Learned counsel further submits that the second respondent,

¶29

vide Government Order dated 02.03.2020 bearing No.553/AIL/LAB/T/2020, appointed one Mr.D.Ramabathiran, District Judge (Retired) to conduct an enquiry under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and no enquiry was conducted and no such enquiry report was furnished to the Government. The office of the third respondent kept depositing monies under various heads for a sum of Rs.6,55,083/- in the bank account of the petitioner. The petitioner approached the third respondent and requested clarification in respect of the deposited amounts. The office of the third respondent stated that the said amount deposited is only a temporary arrangement so that the workmen may not suffer

¶30

3/10

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶33

financially, therefore, the amount was deposited. Admittedly, the third respondent has violated Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Therefore, the closure of the third respondent Mill on 30.04.2020 is illegal. Neither the mandatory order under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act was passed nor granting permission for closure of the third respondent Mill was communicated to the trade unions. The third respondent promised the petitioner and other similarly placed workmen that they would be offered Settlement. Further, the promise made in the Form 'QA' has been violated by the third respondent, and therefore, when the very basis of closure is on VRS or Settlement and when the same has not been granted, the closure ought to be declared as illegal. The workmen have not been paid wages from 2019 onwards. Hence the petitioner filed this writ petition, and the same has to be allowed.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner would then place reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.5360 & 5365 of 2021 (Swadeshi Panchalai Thozilalar Urimai Padukappu Sangam, No.23, 1^st Floor, Middle Street, Veeman Nagar, Thilaspet, Puducherry – 606 009. Rep. by its President, Mr.K.Mohandass Vs. The Secretary, Industries and Commerce,

¶35

4/10

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶38

Government of Puducherry, Puducherry and 5 others).

¶39

A counter affidavit was filed by the respondents dated

¶40

07.06.2025.

¶41

Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the Ministry of Home Affairs, vide letter dated 19.03.2020, stated that the matter has been considered in view of the fact that the Management of Anglo French Textiles Mills has passed a resolution to close down the operation of the Mill and file statutory notice of closure under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before the Competent Authority, Puducherry. The Government has appointed Mr.D.Ramabathiran, District Judge (Retired), as Enquiry Authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to examine the applications filed by the Mill, and the Enquiry Authority has submitted his report recommending closure of the Mills, and the report was submitted to the Government for approval for notifying the closure of the Mills. The closure application was filed with the Competent Authority under Section 25(O), Sub Section (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 on 21.01.2020, and the closure application was resubmitted on 06.02.2020. The deemed period of 60 days expired on

¶42

5/10

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶45

06.04.2020. As per Section 25(O), subsection (3), since no communication refusing the closure has been received by the Anglo French Textiles Management from the Competent Authority within 60 days, the date of closure takes effect from 30.04.2020, as in the closure application. The closure notice dated 13.08.2020 was exhibited, stating that the Mill was closed with effect from 30.04.2020 as per the direction of the Hon'ble Lt.Governor, Puducherry. Further, the terminal benefits amounts were already settled to all the employees including the petitioner, and the petitioner has received a sum of Rs.10,92,682/- and the same was acknowledged by the stamp receipt. Therefore, there is no procedural violation under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the petitioner after receipt of the entire terminal benefits, cannot file this petition. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed.

¶46

This Court heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶47

The main contention raised by the petitioner is that there are procedural violations under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

¶48

6/10

¶49

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

¶50

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶51

and no report was submitted to the Government and the Government has not passed any closure order under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act. As per the counter filed by the respondents, the retired District Judge, namely, D.Ramabathiram, was appointed as an Enquiry Authority to examine the application filed by the Mill under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act. He has also submitted the report before the Government recommending closure of the Mill for approval, and the same was approved by the Government. The petitioner also admitted the receipt of the terminal benefits through his bank account. According to the petitioner, the same was credited without knowledge of the petitioner. Even assuming that the amount was credited without knowledge of the petitioner, he has not taken steps with regard to the deposited amount. Since the statutory procedure under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act was followed by the Government and the deemed period of 60 days expired on 06.04.2020, and the petitioner also received the entire terminal benefits and the respondents have paid a sum of Rs.10,92,682/- including pending wages from 2019-2020 and 2012-2013, and after accepting the terminal benefits, the petitioner cannot raise objection for the closure of the Mill.

¶52

7/10

¶53

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

¶54

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶55

The terminal benefits settled to the petitioner as per the

¶56

respondents stated in the counter affidavits are as follows:

¶57

Sl.	Particulars	Amount
No.		Rs.
1	Closure Compensation	3,95,018
2	Gratuity	4,00,100
3	Interest on Gratuity	57,916
4	Leave Salary	23,687
5	Retirement Benefit Fund	25,000
6	Family Welfare Fund	1,575
7	IDA Arrears	37,812
8	Pending Wages – 2019-20	1,28,300
9	Pending Wages – 2012-13	23,274
	Total	10,92,682

¶58

In order to prove the same, the respondents also produced a

¶59

copy of the payments settled to the petitioner.

¶60

The petitioner also did not dispute the same. After receipt of the terminal benefits, the petitioner cannot raise any objection with regard to the closure of the third respondent's Mill. At this juncture, the petitioner also produced the judgment of this Court in W.P.Nos.5360 & 5365 of 2021

¶61

(Swadeshi Panchalai Thozilalar Urimai Padukappu Sangam, No.23, 1^st

¶62

Floor, Middle Street, Veeman Nagar, Thilaspet, Puducherry – 606 009.

¶63

8/10

¶64

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

¶65

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶66

Rep. by its President, Mr.K.Mohandass Vs. The Secretary, Industries and

¶67

Commerce, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry and 5 others).

¶68

Even as per the aforesaid judgment, the workmen will not be entitled to any relief; when he already accepted the monetary benefits and the money was settled. In the case at hand also, after accepting the monetary benefits on 09.08.2021, the petitioner filed this writ petition on 03.01.2022. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, and this writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶69

Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed . No costs.

¶70

10.06.2025

¶71

cda Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-Speaking Order

¶72

9/10

¶73

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

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

P.DHANABAL, J.

cda

1.The Secretary, Industries and Commerce, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶79

2.The Secretary (Labour), Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.

¶80

3.The Managing Director, Anglo French Textiles, A unit of Pondicherry Textile Corporation Ltd., Cuddalore Road, Mudaliarpet, Puducherry – 605 004.

¶81

W.P.No.1049 of 2022

¶82

10.06.2025

¶83

10/10

¶84

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

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Closure of the third respondent Mill (Anglo French Textiles) with effect from 30.04.2020 pursuant to Form QA dated 21.01.2020 issued under Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, challenged as illegal; closure took effect on expiry of the 60-day deemed period under Section 25(O)(3) without refusal by the Competent Authority.¶45
Competent Authority, Puducherry · 30.04.2020
Prior proceeding
Statutory notice dated 21.01.2020 under Section 25(O) served on all trade unions proposing closure of the Mill with effect from 30.04.2020; Form 'QA' annexed, Column 24 of which recorded that the Government of Puducherry proposed 'VRS or Settlement'.¶21
Prior proceeding
Government Order dated 02.03.2020 bearing No.553/AIL/LAB/T/2020 appointing Mr.D.Ramabathiran, District Judge (Retired), as Enquiry Authority under Section 25(O); petitioner alleges no enquiry was conducted and no enquiry report was furnished to the Government.¶29
Prior proceeding
Per respondents: closure application filed with the Competent Authority under Section 25(O), Sub Section (1) on 21.01.2020 and resubmitted on 06.02.2020; deemed period of 60 days expired on 06.04.2020.¶41
Prior proceeding
Per respondents: the Enquiry Authority submitted his report recommending closure of the Mills, and the report was submitted to the Government for approval for notifying the closure.¶41
Prior proceeding
Closure notice dated 13.08.2020 exhibited, stating that the Mill was closed with effect from 30.04.2020 as per the direction of the Hon'ble Lt.Governor, Puducherry.¶45
Prior proceeding
Terminal benefits settled to all employees including the petitioner; petitioner received Rs.10,92,682/-, acknowledged by stamp receipt (per respondents' counter affidavit).¶45
Prior proceeding
Third respondent deposited monies under various heads totalling Rs.6,55,083/- in the petitioner's bank account, described as a temporary arrangement so that workmen may not suffer financially.¶29
Prior proceeding
Counter affidavit filed by the respondents (dated 07.06.2025).¶39
Prior proceeding
Petitioner accepted the monetary benefits on 09.08.2021; writ petition filed on 03.01.2022.¶68

R.ravichandran v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.ravichandran v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Asir Vs the Management of Devi Polymers Private Limited

The Management of Vs a.Raju

Gummidipoondi Thoguthi Pothu Vs The Management

Tata Communications Limited Vs Appellaet Authority under Tamil Nadu

K.Palanisamy Vs The Management of Tamil Nadu

The Management Vs the Special Deputy Commissioner of Labour