Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/765/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 765 of 2008
=========================================
MAHINDRA
GUJARAT TRACTORS LTD. & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DALJITSING
P. SAINI & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
NANAVATI
ASSOCIATES for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
RULE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
MR RAJESH P MANKAD for
Respondent(s) : 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 16/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. Learned
advocate Mr. Chudgar appears for the petitioners and Mr. R.P.
Mankand, learned advocate appears for the respondent. The advocates
for the respective parties have inter se settled the dispute outside
the Court and accordingly, the controversy between the parties,
involved in the petition has been fully and finally settled.
2. The
learned advocates have placed on record the terms as per which the
settlement between the parties has been arrived at.
3. Today,
during the hearing, Mr. Mankad, learned advocate for respondent and
Mr. Chudgar, learned advocate for the petitioner jointly submitted
that after the said consent terms were recorded and signed, there
were certain differences between the parties which also have been
settled after subsequent deliberations over the said differences and
that therefore, the parties jointly request the Court to add and
accept the subsequent agreement as a part of the consent terms.
4. In
this context, Mr. Mankad, learned advocate requested that the
departmental proceedings, which are pending against the respondent
workman may be considered and decided sympathetically. Mr. Chudgar,
learned advocate on instruction, agreed for the said request and
stated that the management will consider the said request and decide
the matter sympathetically and the order in the inquiry would be
accordingly made. It is agreed between the parties that the said
understanding also shall form part of the aforesaid consent terms.
Mr. Mankad and Mr. Chudgar, learned advocates have also stated that
for the purpose of service record and retirement dues, the service of
the respondent will be considered as continuous and continuity of
service will be maintained.
5.
Mr. Chudgar also stated that in view of the request made by Mr.
Mankad, the Company has agreed to pay Rs.3500/- as an exgressia
payment. The said agreement is also to be part for the above referred
consent terms. No other momentary claim or demand shall be raised by
the respondent in connection with subject matter of this petition
and/or for the period consumed during the proceedings.
6. The
parties have jointly requested that in light of the said settlement
and consent terms, the impugned award may be modified.
6. Mr.
More, Assistant Manager (I.R. & H.R.) is present in the Court and
the statements and stipulations made by Mr. Chudagar, learned
advocate have been made on instruction of the said officer.
7. In
light of the full and final settlement arrived at between the parties
on the aforesaid terms and conditions and those stated in the consent
terms dated 7.7.2008 the award dated 5.12.2007 passed in Complaint
(IT) No.61 of 2006 in Demand Reference (IT) Case No.67 of 2002 stands
modified and shall be deemed to have been fully complied with. In
view of the above observation, the petition stands disposed of. Ad
interim relief granted earlier, stands vacated. Notice is discharged.
(K.M.THAKER,
J.)
ynvyas
Top