Settlements encouraged by the courts should bring lasting peace between the parties, and the interim order lapsed after the disposal of the main writ petition.

1. The petitioner is an employer. They have come forward to challenge an order passed by the first respondent Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal made in ATA No.405/13/2006 and seeks to set aside the order dated 3.5.2011. When the matter came up on 9.8.2011, this court directed Mr.K.Gunasekaran, learned counsel for the PF Department to take notice for second respondent. Accordingly, he took notice and he has also filed a counter affidavit, dated 12.8.2011.

2. The circumstances leading to filing of the present writ petition are as follows:

It is seen from the records that one Sivadasan, the third respondent, who was working as a driver in the petitioner company was discharged by an order dated 7.3.1997 after payment of notice pay and compensation. At that time, the Company had decided to sell a three wheeler of the company, which was an Autorickshaw. After the receipt of the compensation, the said Sivadasan had raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Subsequently, the dispute was taken to the Labour Court, Coimbatore and was taken on file as I.D.No.320/1997 by the Labour Court. After notice to the petitioner company, an Award was passed on 3.7.2002, wherein and by which the Labour Court had directed reinstatement of Sivadasan with backwages and other attendant benefits. The petitioner management filed a writ petition before this court being W.P.No.5776 of 2004. This Court had granted an interim stay on condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of backwages ordered by the Labour Court. The management had also complied with the condition and had deposited the said amount with the labour court on 2.4.2004. The workman had reported duty on 27.12.2003.

3. In the meanwhile, when the matter was pending before this court, the workman came up for a compromise to settle the matter amicably. Therefore, a settlement was reached between the management and the workman Sivadasan under Section 18(1) of the ID Act. By the said settlement, the workman had agreed to accept his discharge order dated 7.3.1997 and also agreed that he was deemed to be relieved from the date of discharge. In lieu of the said acceptance, the management had agreed to pay Rs.2,35,000/- as a full and final settlement of accounts including payment of gratuity, bonus, leave salary, arrears of salary, exgratia in the manner indicated therein. The workmen had also agreed that the management can withdraw Rs.74880/- deposited with the labour court as a condition imposed to maintain the grant of stay. He had also agreed not to press his complaint for claiming minimum wages. He had also agreed to withdraw the computation petition in C.P. No.911/2003 pending before the labour court, Coimbatore. The management had also agreed that a sum of Rs.18,015.15 settled along with the discharge order can be retained by the workmen. The settlement, dated 6.5.2004 settling the industrial dispute and the other pending issues between the management and the workman Sivadasan was complied with and the workman had also received the amount of Rs.2,35,000/- and passed on the receipt. A memo was filed before the labour court for withdrawing the computation petition. The matter was reported before this court and this court had dismissed W.P.No.5776 of 2004 as being settled out of court in terms of memorandum of settlement dated 6.5.2004.

4. It was after the disposal of the writ petition, the second respondent sent a notice dated 12.10.2004 stating that since the amount of Rs.2,35,000/- was paid towards gratuity, bonus, leave salary, arrears, exgratia, the management was directed to inform as to the amount of backwages paid to the workmen. The petitioner management replied that no backwages were paid and the workman had agreed to receive the amount paid in respect of other heads and also withdrew his industrial dispute. In the meanwhile, the workmen had sent a report to the respondent PF authorities