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

2022 Supreme(Online)(All) 19224

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
M/S MENTHA and ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD. THRU AUTH. SIGNATORY – Appellant
Versus
LABOUR COURT U.P. and ANOTHER – Respondent
WRIC 9712/2017



Advocates:
['SHAKTI SWARUP NIGAM', '', 'ALOK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA', 'C S C', '', 'ARVIND KUMAR SINGH']

Court No. - 38

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9712 of 2017

Petitioner :- M/S Mentha And Allied Products Ltd. Thru Auth. Signatory

Respondent :- Labour Court U.P. And Another

Counsel for Petitioner :- Shakti Swarup Nigam,Alok Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arvind Kumar Singh

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

1. Heard Shri Shakti Swarup Nigam, Senior Advocate, assisted

by Shri Alok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Shri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

respondent workman.

2. Present revision has been filed by the employer against the

award of the Labour Court, Bareilly, dated 8.8.2016 in

Adjudication Case No. 57 of 1997. By that award, Labour

Court had granted lump-sum compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- to

the respondent workman. The above adjudication case had

arisen on following reference made to the Labour Court:

"Kya Sewayojakon Dwara Apne Shramik Shri Umesh Chandra Verma Putra Shri Brijlal

Verma, Pad Operator Ko Dinaank 12.2.96 Se Naukri Se Prithak Kiya Jaana

Ucchit/Vaidhanik Hai? Yadi Nahin Toh Karamchari Kis Hitlaabh/Chhatipurti Paane Ka

Adhikari Hai?"

3. While various arguments were advanced, at the same time,

on the suggestion of the Court, the petitioner has offered to pay

lump-sum compensation Rs. 3,00,000/- to the respondent

workman in lieu of all claims under the award and other laws

including gratuity, by way of full and final settlement.

4. Upon telephonic instructions received by Shri Singh, it has

been informed that the respondent workman is agreeable to the

offer so made by the petitioner. Accordingly, no useful purpose

would be served in making adjudication on merits.

5. Upon consent of the parties that has now arisen, the

impugned award is modified to the extent that the amount Rs.

3,00,000/- be paid to the respondent workman by the petitioner

towards all his claims under the impugned award and other laws

including gratuity, by way of full and final settlement. Such

amount may be deposited to the Labour Court within a period

of one month whereupon the same may be released in favour of

respondent workman. In case, the petitioner fails to deposit

such amount, it may be further obligated to deposit the same

along with interest @ 8% from today till the date of actual

payment.

6. Writ petition stands partly allowed.

Order Date :- 21.7.2022

Prakhar

Digitally signed by PRAKHAR

SRIVASTAVA

Date: 2022.07.22 10:04:00 IST

Reason:

Location: High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad

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