79. But as a litigative pursuit has it hazards, the settlement by sacrificing a right to continue in employment in the hope of retaining another ended up in the loss of both. This is the story of the appellant’s hopes ending in a unexpected demise due to the strategy of the management.

80. The compromise could not have been made a ruse by the management to get rid of the appellant of all his valid claim that was not allowed to be adjudicated in either of the three writ petitions.

81. The management cannot be permitted to resile back from a compromise as has been indicated in the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Dhyan Singh and another v. Judgal Kishore and another, AIR 1952 SC 145, while discussing the doctrine of estoppel that has been followed by a learned Single Judge in the case of Smt.Manraji v. Deputy Director Consolidation, 2005(1) AWC 704, paragraph No. 9 extracted hereinunder:

“There is another aspect of the matter. The parties to a compromise are bound by estoppel as well. The principle of estoppel prevents the parties to resile from the compromise or to revoke it after having taken advantage of the same. This principle has been approved by the Apex Court in numb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document