The Senior Director, Mbd Group, New Delhi Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bbsr — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

The Senior Director, Mbd Group, New Delhi Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bbsr — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of on the basis of the amicable settlement: a demand draft of Rs. 3 lakh was handed over to learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2 in Court on 23rd June, 2025; the workman was given liberty/observation to report for duty with the management within one month; and the Labour Court award was modified to the aforesaid extent.

Issue for consideration

Whether the award dated 1st November, 2022 passed by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in ID Case No. 11 of 2018, directing reinstatement of the workman (Opposite Party No.2) with back wages after adjusting Rs.33,522/- already paid, could be sustained against the challenge in this writ petition.

Court's answer

On the joint submission of learned counsel for the parties that the settlement had been implemented (a demand draft of Rs. 3 lakh drawn in favour of Opposite Party No.2 having been handed over to her counsel in Court on 23rd June, 2025), the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that the workman, Smt. Babita Parida, may report for duty with the management within a period of one month.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the award dated 1st November, 2022 passed by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar is modified to the extent of the settlement (reinstatement with consolidated back wages of Rs. 3 Lakh in lieu of the earlier terms).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 7677 of 2023, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Order No. 08 dated 01.07.2025; Coram: Justices K.R. Mohapatra and Savitri Ratho) assailed the award dated 1st November, 2022 (Annexure-7) of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in ID Case No. 11 of 2018, whereby the workman, Smt. Babita Parida (Opposite Party No.2), was directed to be reinstated with back wages after adjusting Rs.33,522/- already paid to her towards full and final settlement. In course of hearing, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement to reinstate the workman with a consolidated sum of Rs. 3 Lakh as back wages, and a demand draft for Rs. 3 lakh was handed over to her learned counsel in Court on 23rd June, 2025. On the joint submission of counsel that the settlement stood implemented, the Division Bench disposed of the writ petition with an observation that the workman may report for duty with the management within a period of one month, and modified the award to the aforesaid extent.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C). NO. 7677 OF 2023

1. The Senior Director, MBD Group, MBD House, New Delhi 2. The Zonal Head, Holyfaith International Pvt. Ltd., Link Road, Cuttack …. Petitioners

Mr. Bibhu Prasad Panda, Advocate

-versus-

1. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar

2. Smt. Babita Parida

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Manmaya Kumar Dash, A.S.C. (for Opposite Party No.1) Mr. Bamadev Baral, Advocate (for Opposite Party No.2)

CORAM:

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

01.07.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Petitioner in this writ application seeks to assail the award dated 1^st November, 2022 (Annexure-7) passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in ID Case No. 11 of 2018 by directing reinstatement of the workman- Opposite Party No.2 with back wages after adjusting Rs.33,522/- which has already been paid to her towards full and final settlement.

In course of hearing, an amicable settlement was arrived at between the parties to reinstate the Opposite Party No.2 with a consolidated amount of Rs. 3 Lakh as back wages.

Pursuant to the said settlement, a demand draft of Rs. 3 lakh drawn in favour of the Opposite Party No.2 was handed over to Mr.

Page 1 of 2

Baral, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 in Court on 23^rd June, 2025. This Court also observed that the Opposite party No.2 may report for reinstatement with the management by 30^th June, 2025. Mr. Baral, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 submits that due to her ill health the Opposite Party No. 2 could not report for reinstatement as yet.

Both Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Baral, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 submit that since a demand draft of Rs. 3 lakh drawn in favour of Opposite Party No.2 has already been handed over to learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No. 2, the writ petition may be disposed of, with a liberty to the Opposite Party No.2 to report for duty with the management.

In view of such submission made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that the Opposite Party No.2- workman, namely, Smt. Babita Parida may report for duty with the management within a period of one month hence.

In view of the settlement arrived at the award is modified to the aforesaid extent.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

Subhalaxmi

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 02-Jul-2025 10:50:04

Page 2 of 2