Madras High Court
The Management vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Labour ... on 10 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
and
C.M.P.(MD).No.11739 of 2019
The Management,
Gandhigramkhadi and Village Industries
Public Charitable Trust,
represented by its Secretary, M.R.Rajagopalan,
Gandhigram-624 302,
Dindigul District. : Appellant / Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour /
Appropriate Authority under
Tamil Nadu Shop and Establishment Act,
Dindigul.
2. P.Arumugam : Respondents / Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
praying to set aside the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.7688
of 2017, dated 13.02.2018 and allow the Writ Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Karthikeyan
For R-1 : No Appearance
For Respondent No.2 : Mr.Ajay Khose
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ for Mr.A.Rahul
1/4
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
JUDGMENT
***************
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
This appeal by the Management of Gandhigramkhadi and
Village Industries Public Charitable Trust, is directed against the order,
dated 13.02.2018 passed in W.P.(MD).No.7688 of 2017, filed by the
appellant / Trust, which has been disposed of based on certain
concession / submission made on behalf of the second respondent /
workman.
2. We have heard Mr.V.Karthikeyan, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner and Mr.Ajay Khose, learned counsel for Mr.A.Rahul,
learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
3. On a perusal of the impugned order, dated 13.02.2018, we
find that the learned Writ Court did not adjudicate the correctness of the
decision taken by the Authority under the Tamil Nadu Shops and
Establishments Act, in its order, dated 04.04.2017, impugned in the Writ
Petition, but proceeded to record the statement alleged to have been
made on behalf of the second respondent / workman agreeing to remit a
sum of Rs.16,850/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty
only) to the appellant / Trust and the appellant / Trust would settle the
terminal benefits. We find that no such concession was accepted by the
appellant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ / Trust and there is nothing in writing.
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
4. Therefore, the learned Writ Court was required to decide the
correctness of the order passed by the first respondent and cannot
dispose of the writ petition in the manner done. Therefore, the impugned
order calls for interference.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed and the order passed
in the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No.7688 of 2017, dated 13.02.2018, is set
aside. The Writ Petition is restored to the file of the learned Single Judge
and the matter be listed before the appropriate Bench for hearing during
the 2nd week of July 2021 and with a request to the concerned Bench to
give an early date for the hearing of the writ petition and the impugned
order passed in the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act was dated
04.04.2017 and the Writ Petition was filed before this Court in the year
2017. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
10.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
tsg/ps
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
tsg/ps
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy,
shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.1620 of 2018
Dated :
10.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
