SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Wearwell (India) Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Nizam - Respondent
W.P.(C) 2034 of 2022
Decided On : 02-02-2022




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.

Headnote:(A) Payment of Wages Act, 1936 - Section 15(2) - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Settlement of wages - The appellant challenges the appellate court's order setting aside a penalty against the management and denying a refund of pre-deposit despite a settlement reached. (Paras 3, 5, 10)

(B) Legal binding of settlements - The court emphasized that settlements entered into under Section 18 of the ID Act, whether through conciliation or otherwise, are valid and binding. Non-appearance by the worker does not invalidate the settlement, as long as the terms are legally sound. (Paras 14, 16)

Facts of the case:
The respondent was suspended by the management and later claimed termination. After several legal proceedings including a settlement, disputes arose regarding wage payments, leading to the current writ petition. (Paras 4, 6)

Findings of Court:
The appellate court improperly refused to acknowledge the settlement despite the worker encashing the cheque from management, thus the pre-deposit was ordered refunded. (Paras 10, 20)

Issues: The main issues include the validity of the settlement agreement and the authority of the appellate court to disregard it due to the worker's non-appearance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that as long as the agreement was signed by the worker and there are no allegations of coercion or misrepresentation, the settlement is valid. (Paras 16, 17)

Result: The impugned order is set aside; the pre-deposit amount is to be refunded to the management.

Table of Content
1. challenge of orders under the payment of wages act (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. overview of the appellate court's assessment of the settlement (Para 8 , 10)
3. legality and binding nature of settlements outside court (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16)
4. confirmation of settlements in the absence of counterclaims (Para 15 , 17 , 19)
5. final order to refund the deposit based on settlement (Para 20 , 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 5850/2022 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

WP(C) 2034/2022 & CM APPL. 5849/2022 (for stay)

3. The present writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 7th August, 2020 in RCA No. 53/2019 titled Wearwell (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Mohd. Nizam, passed by the D&SJ, South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter "Appellate Court"). Vide the impugned order the appeal against the order dated 29th November, 2018 in PWA No. 73/2018 titled Mohd. Nizam v. M/s Wear Well India Pvt. Ltd., passed by Addl. D&SJ, POLC-V, Dwarka Courts, Delhi (hereinafter "Authority") under the section 15(2), PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT , 1936 (hereinafter "Act") has been partially set aside.

4. The background of this petition is that the Respondent/Workman (hereinafter "Workman") was working as a Tailor with the Petitioner/Management (hereinafter "Management") and the last drawn salary was Rs.11,830/-. The Management claims that it had placed the Workman under suspension on 16th December, 2017 and a charge sheet was issued. However, the claim of the Workman was that he was terminated by the Management on 18th December 2017.

5. The Workman then approached the Conciliation Officer under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 wherein he along with 21 other workmen, entered into a settlement dated 03rd May 2018 with the Management. Terms of the said settlement read as under:

    "1. The management will reinstate all the complainant workmen expect Sh. Kalim, Sh. Hussain and Sh. Firoz, with the continuity of service w.e.f. 04/05/2018.

    2. The workmen have agreed that they will work with honesty and will maintain peace in the factory and will help to increase the production.

    3. It has also been agreed between both the parties that the interest of peace and harmony of the factory, all the disputes/claims/complaints of bonus and contract Labour raised/filed by them shall be deemed to have been withdrawn after this settlement. The management has also agreed to withdraw all the cases i.e. charge sheet, suspension order/police complaints against the workmen."

6. However, disputes thereafter arose in respect of the amount payable as per the terms of the said settlement entered into before the Conciliation officer. This led to the Workman approaching the authority under section 15(2) of the Act. The said dispute was adjudicated by the Authority on 29th November, 2018 by holding that a sum of Rs.3,01,466/- would be payable to the Workman. The order reads as under:

    "30. In view of the outcome of issue No.2, the claimant is held entitled to an amount of Rs.3,01,466/- (27,406 + 2,74,060 amount of wages deducted + 10 times penalty).

    31. Accordingly, in these circumstances, in terms of provisions of Section 15 (5) (b) of PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT , 1936, the court hereby issue a direction to the ld. CMM, Dwarka Court to recover the said amount of Rs.3,01,466/- as if it were a fine imposed by a Magistrate in terms of provisions of Section 421 (1) (a) of the Cr.P.C.

    32. Petition accordingly stands Allowed."

7. The said order of the Authority was challenged before the ld. Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) 2349/2019 titled Wearwell (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Mohd. Nizam. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 13th March 2019 while granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Appellate Court under the Act after depositing the amount of Rs.27,406/-. The order reads as under:

    "2. This Court is satisfied that this

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top