M/S.Dindigul Thalappakatti Biriyani Restaurant Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

M/S.Dindigul Thalappakatti Biriyani Restaurant Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petitions disposed of with directions: petitioner permitted to submit documentary evidence and witnesses before the first respondent within the stipulated time; first respondent to pass appropriate orders in the main case after providing opportunity to either party, within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; impugned orders not interfered with; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should interfere with the impugned orders passed by the first respondent allowing the condone-delay applications (I.A.Nos. 190/2023, 189/2023, 191/2023 and 188/2023 dated 04.03.2024), or instead permit the petitioner to adduce documentary evidence and witnesses and canvass its points before the first respondent in the main case.

Court's answer

Without interfering with the impugned orders, the Court directed the first respondent to allow the petitioner to submit documentary evidence as well as necessary witnesses before it within the stipulated time as fixed.

Ratio / Principle

Thereafter the first respondent is to consider the material and pass appropriate orders in the main case, providing opportunity to both parties, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Madras (M. Dhandapani J., 27-03-2025) disposed of four writ petitions under Article 226 filed by M/s. Dindigul Thalappakatti Biriyani Restaurant challenging the orders dated 04.03.2024 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Labour-II / Employees Compensation Court II, Chennai in I.A.Nos. 190/2023, 189/2023, 191/2023 and 188/2023, whereby condonation of delay was allowed in compensation applications under Section 10 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 claiming Rs.60,00,000/- moved by dependants of four workers (V. Vedhachalam; K. Gandhimathi; N. Manimala; K. Nagammal) who died on 19.01.2016 inhaling poisonous gas while rescuing co-worker Velumurugan from the petitioner's private sewage tank at Thoraipakkam, OMR, being cleaned by the third respondent OMR Transport's machinised suction-truck crew. An FIR (Crime No.62/2016, J-11 Kannagi Nagar Police Station) was registered under Sections 288 and 304 IPC and Section 8 of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013; the charge sheet against five persons was taken on file as C.C. No.1267 of 2016 (Judicial Magistrate, Alandur), against which the Management had filed a quashing petition. The petitioner had paid Rs.10,00,000/- one-time solatium to the dependants as per the Supreme Court order (counsel invoked Safari Karamchari Andolam). The Court, without interfering with the impugned orders and noting the petitioner's limited request, directed the first respondent to receive the petitioner's documentary evidence and witnesses within the stipulated time and thereafter pass appropriate orders in the main case after giving opportunity to both parties, within eight weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petitions disposed of; connected miscellaneous petitions closed; no costs.

WP No. 8632 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-03-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

WP No. 8632, 8636, 8633 and 8634 OF 2025 and WMP NO. 9656, 9657 OF 2025, 9658, 9659, 9654 OF 2025, 9655, 9660 and 9661 OF 2025

M/s.Dindigul Thalappakatti Biriyani Restaurant Represented By Its Authorised Signatory, Plot No 18, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Sri Sowdeswari Nagar, Okkiyampettai, Thoraipakkam, Chennai 600097.

Petitioner in all the petitions

Vs

The Joint Commissioner Of Labour-II Employees Compensation Court II, Chennai 600006.

V.Vedhachalam

3.M/s.OMR Transport Prop D.Ravi, S/o.Dhanapal, No.5/21 Bharathiyar Stretet, Okkiyam Pettai, Chennai 600097.

Respondents in W.P.No.8632 of 2025

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

The Joint Commissioner Of Labour-II Employees Compensation Court II, Chennai 600006.

2.K.Gandhimathi

3.M/s.OMR Transport Prop D.Ravi, S/o.Dhanapal, No.5/21 Bharathiyar Stretet, Okkiyam Pettai, Chennai 600097.

Respondents in W.P.no.8633 of 2025

The Joint Commissioner Of Labour-II Employees Compensation Court II, Chennai 600006.

2.N.Manimala

3.M/s.OMR Transport

Prop D.Ravi, S/o.Dhanapal, No.5/21 Bharathiyar Stretet, Okkiyam Pettai, Chennai 600097.

Respondent(s) in WP No. 8634 of 2025

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

The Joint Commissioner Of Labour-II

Employees Compensation Court II, Chennai 600006.

2.K.Nagammal

3.M/s.OMR Transport

Prop D.Ravi, S/o.Dhanapal, No.5/21 Bharathiyar Stretet, Okkiyam Pettai, Chennai 600097.

....Respondents in W.P.No.8636 of 2025

WP No. 8632 of 2025 : The writ petition has been filed under Article under 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in I.A.No. 190/2023 dated 04.03.2024 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and pass.

WP No. 8633 of 2025 : The writ petition has been filed under Article under 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in I.A.No. 189/2023 dated 04.03.2024 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and pass.

WP No. 8634 of 2025: The writ petition has been filed under Article under 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in I.A.No. 191/2023 dated 04.03.2024 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and pass.

WP No. 8636 of 2025 : The writ petition has been filed under Article under 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in I.A.No. 188/2023 dated 04.03.2024 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and pass.

For Petitioner(s): MR. S. Karthick In all the

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

Sr. Counsel W.P.'s FOR Vijayan Subramanian (In all the petitions) For Respondent(s): MR. R.Muralidharan In all the W.P.s FOR R2 MR. K. Surendran, AGP FOR RR1 R3 – Not ready notice (In all the petitions)

COMMON ORDER

These writ petitions have been filed seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in I.A.No. 190/2023, 189/2023, 191/2023 and 188/2023 dated 04.03.2024.

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had engaged the services of the 3rd respondent, who is in the field of sewage tank cleaning to clean its private sewage tank at one of its restaurants at Thoraipakkam, OMR. The petitioner further states the 3rd respondent had sent its machinsied suction truck along with its driver, cleaner and other works to clean the sewage tank on 19.01.2016. After sucking up the water, one of the employees of the 3rd respondent, namely Velumurugan fell inside the sewage tank. The other persons namely Rajesh, Kumar, Saravanan tried to help the said person, getting into the tank and inhaled the poisonous gas and fell unconscious. Unfortunately, they lost their lives. Based on the complaint given by the Village Administrative Officer, Thoraipakkam, an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.62/2016

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

dated 19.01.2016 on the file of J-11 Kannagi Nagar Police station for the offences under Section 288, 304 IPC and Section 8 of Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. The petitioner company had given a one-time solatium a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- vide a Demand Draft No.026270 dated 27.01.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank, Mylapore Branch to the dependents of the deceased persons as per the order of the Supreme Court.

After investigation, the Police registered a case as against 5 persons and filed charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur and the same was taken on file as CC. No.1267 of 2016. Aggrieved by the said CC, the Management has filed a petition to quash the CC. After a period of seven years, the second respondent herein had filed an application under Section 10 of the Employees compensation Act, 1923 before the first respondent praying for the relief of payment of compensation of a sum of Rs.60,00,000/- under the Employees compensation Act and condone delay application was also filed in in I.A.No.190, 189, 191 & 188/2023 and the same was allowed. To quash the said order, these writ petitions have been filed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present writ petitions have been filed solely on the ground that there was settlement between the petitioner and the deceased employee families before the Corporation officials and some of the legal heirs of the deceased employee, have not arrayed

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

as party before the trial Court. Even then the first respondent allowed the condone delay of 2055 days is contrary to law. The second respondent has not even mentioned the fact that the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Safari Karamchari Andolam and others and Union of India and others. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that this Court, without interfering with the impugned order, permit the petitioner to let in documentary evidence and to canvass all the points before the first respondent.

The learned counsel for the second respondent have not raised any objection in this regard.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited request sought for by the petitioner, this Court without interfering with the impugned order, directs the first respondent to allow the petitioner to submit the documentary evidence as well as the necessary witnesses before it within the stipulated time as fixed. Thereafter, the first respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in the main case, after providing opportunity to either parties, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

of this order.

With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

27-03-2025

Rli

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

M.DHANDAPANI J.

rli

To

The Joint Commissioner Of Labour-ii Employees Compensation Court Ii, Chennai 600006.

WP No. 8632, 8636, 8633 and 8634 OF 2025

27-03-2025

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

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

WP No. 8632 of 2025

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