Madras High Court
C. Govindaraj vs 2 The Management on 3 August, 2023
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.08.2023
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHAN
and
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
C. Govindaraj Appellant
v
1 The Presiding Officer
Labour Court, Coimbatore
2 The Management
Narasimha Mills (P) Ltd.
(a unit of Thiruvalluvar Textiles (P) Ltd.)
N.S.N. Palayam
Coimbatore 641 031 Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging the
order dated 25.01.2019 passed in W.P. No.4201 of 2013.
For appellant Mr. S. Saravanan
R1 Court
For R2 Mr. M.R. Thangavel
JUDGMENT
(made by S. VAIDYANATHAN, J.)
Mr. M.R. Thangavel, accepts notice for the second respondent.
2 This writ appeal has been preferred challenging the order dated
25.01.2019 passed by a Single Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4201 of 2013.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
3 For the sake of clarity, the appellant, the first respondent and second
respondent will be adverted to as the workman, the Labour Court and the
Management, respectively.
4 The appellant joined the services of the Management in the Power
House Department as a Switch Operator on 18.01.1970 and his services were
confirmed on 01.02.1972. He moved the Labour Court by filing a computation
petition in C.P. No.532 of 2006 claiming that he was not paid a sum of
Rs.76,631/- by the earlier Management.
5 The Labour Court, vide order dated 21.06.2012, noting that the
workman had received some amount towards full and final settlement, besides
giving an undertaking that he will not file any case against the Management,
dismissed the computation petition.
6 Aggrieved, the workman filed a writ petition being W.P. No.4201 of
2013, which came to be dismissed by a Single Bench vide order dated 25.01.2019,
upholding the order dated 21.06.2012 passed by the Labour Court, as against
which, this writ appeal has been filed by the workman.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
7 Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.
8 As rightly observed by the Labour Court and the Single Bench, the
Management and the workman had entered into a settlement dated 30.03.2006, as
per which, the workman had agreed to give up all the monetary benefits due to
him. The relevant clauses of the said settlement, viz., clauses 7 to 9, are scanned
below for ease of reference.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
9 The Single Bench, in the order impugned, has extracted Section 18 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and held that the aforesaid settlement is binding
between the parties and the workman, having given up all the benefits, is not
entitled to any relief.
10 Superadded, at this juncture, apropos it is to point out that a
Coordinate Bench of this Court, in which, one of us (SVNJ) was a member, while
dealing with W.A.No.105 of 2023 filed by a similarly placed workman of the very
same mill, vide judgment dated 09.01.2023, confirmed the order passed by the
Single Bench as well the Labour Court.
11 For the reasons aforesaid, we find no ground to interfere with the
order passed by the Single Bench confirming the order passed by the Labour
Court.
Ex consequenti, this writ appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. No
costs.
(S.V.N., J.) (K.R.S., J.)
03.08.2023
cad
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
S. VAIDYANATHAN, J.
and
K. RAJASEKAR, J.
cad
To
The Presiding Officer
Labour Court
Coimbatore
W.A. No.1797 of 2023
03.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
