Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G.S. KULKARNI, AARTI SATHE
Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Nandkishor Govind Sane – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the impugned order about settlement implementation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. complaints filed under mrtu & pulp act regarding wage revision. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. analysis of legal provisions about binding settlements. (Para 7 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. arguments regarding maintainability and limitation on complaints. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's rejection of appeal and confirmation of lower court's ruling. (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
G.S. KULKARNI, J.
1. These Letters Patent Appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 18 July, 2011 passed by the learned Single Judge on a batch of Writ Petitions filed by the appellant – Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation (for short “KDMC”). By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge while dismissing the Writ Petitions filed by the KDMC confirmed the orders dated 29 April, 2010 passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Thane allowing the complaints filed by the respondent-workmen. It is thus the concurrent findings of both such forums are being assailed by the KDMC.
2. The facts lie in a narrow compass:-
The respondents are the original complainants, being “workmen” (hereinafter referred to as “the complain
Settlements reached in conciliation proceedings bind all employees, not limited to union members, ensuring rights to unimplemented agreements.
Settlement agreements under Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act bind only parties to those agreements; unrecognized unions cannot enforce them or claim benefits without evidence of participatio....
The court ruled individual workmen can settle disputes but such settlements are not binding on the union or non-signatory workmen, reaffirming the importance of collective bargaining.
The settlement under Section 18(3)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, must be just and fair and cannot bind workmen if it does not meet this standard.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that settlements entered into in Industrial Disputes are valid and legal, even though provisions similar to Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC do not exist in ....
Industrial settlements are binding package deals promoting peace; fraud requires specific proof and timely protest; employee status continues post suspension notice assuring protection until valid vo....
The Settlement executed with the recognized Union becomes binding on all workmen, and the employer cannot deny the benefits of the Settlement to non-members of the recognized union. The recurring cau....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity and binding nature of settlements in industrial disputes, even if not confirmed by both parties, under Section 18(1) of the ID Act.
Settlements under the Payment of Wages Act and the Industrial Disputes Act are binding, even if not acknowledged by one party, provided they are legally sound and voluntarily entered into.
Settlements of wage disputes outside conciliation are valid and binding; a workman's absence in confirming does not invalidate the agreement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
