Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 9075
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Anant Ramanath Hegde, J
M/S SRI SREERAMA SAHAKARA – Appellant
Versus
SRE RAMA SAHAKARA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 17800 OF 2019 (L-RES)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T.P. Vivekananda
For the Respondents: V. Jawahar Babu
Workmen who have not received benefits under a settlement between an employer and a union may seek recovery through representations to the employer or by invoking the remedy under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an award dated 30.05.2018 passed by the Industrial Tribunal at Mysore. The case centers on a settlement dated 18.03.2016 between the employer and workmen, where the employer claims that all payable amounts have been disbursed, while the union contends that several members have not received their dues. The primary issue is whether workmen who claim non-receipt of benefits under the settlement are entitled to recovery. The court observed that if the claims are found to be genuine, the establishment should honor them, and in the event of a dispute, the appropriate legal recourse is available under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Writ petition is disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employer's assertion of fulfillment of settlement terms through payment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. union's claim regarding non-payment and the right to seek recovery. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. agreement to resolve genuine claims through representation. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. judicial direction for representation and statutory remedy under section 33c(2). (Para 8) |
Digitally signed by BELU R CHUNCHANAKATTE, NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DTD30.5.2018 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT MYSORE AT ANNEXURE-N AND DISMISS THE REFERENCE NO.84/2011.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that on 18.03.2016 there was a settlement between the employer and the workman and in terms of the settlement at Annexure-K, the amount payable to the workman is paid.
2. It is further submitted that the persons who claim that they are not the members of the Union which entered into settlement, have also received the amount as agreed in the settlement dated 18.03.2016 and have also executed the document for having received the amount by making reference to the settlement dated 18.03.2016.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-Union would submit that, the members of respondent No.1-Union were not parties to the settlement and further submits that, in case the members of respondent No.1-Union have received the benefit flowing from the settlement dated 18.03.2016 they are not eligible to make any further claim.
4. It is his further submission that, some of the members of respondent No.1-Union are not yet paid the dues as per the settlement dated 18.03.2016.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 would submit that, in case the payment is not received by the members of respondent No.1-Union in terms of the settlement dated 18.03.2016 they should be given liberty to proceed to recover the amount under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
6. Learned counsel the petitioner would submit that, in case any payment is not made as per the terms of the settlement dated 18.03.2016 to any of the members of respondent No.1-Union who worked for the petitioner-Establishment, let such workman approach the petitioner-Establishment and in case the claim is found to be genuine, the petitioner-Establishment will honour the claim. In case of any dispute, the liberty may be reserved to the such workmen who have not received the amount to pursue the remedy under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947.
7. The said submission is placed on record.
8. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. Writ petition is disposed of
ii. The members of respondent No.1-Union who claim that they have not received the benefit under the settlement dated 18.03.2016 may submit a representation making a claim flowing from the settlement dated 18.03.2016.
iii. The petitioner- Establishment shall respond to the representations to be submitted within 30 days from the date of the receipt of copy of this order.
iv. The representations submitted in terms of Annexures-B, C and D, in Writ Petition No.18209/2025 shall be considered within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
v. In case of any dispute, the members of respondent No.1-Union are entitled to pursue the remedy under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
