IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 19744 of 2002.
Date of Decision : January 30, 2009.
Satnam Singh ....... Petitioner.
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala, and another. ...... Respondents.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present: Mr. P.K. Mutneja, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate,with
Mr. Jaspal Singh, Advocate,
for the respondent No. 2.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL).
Counsel for the respondent No. 2-company has placed on record
today the affidavit of Shri A.K. Mahajan, Senior Manager, H.R.A., Kaymore
Cement Works, A.C.C. Limited, District Katni (M.P.), according to which
the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous in the light of the
settlement entered into between the petitioner-workman and respondent No.
2 i.e. Associated Cement Companies Limited. As per the said settlement, the
entire amount in full and final settlement against all the claims of
reinstatement with full back wages with retrospective continuity of service
and other incidental benefits, including gratuity were paid to the petitioner-
workman for which, the petitioner-workman separately executed the receipt
acknowledging receipt of the amount through cheque.
C.W.P. No. 19744 of 2002. -2-
Counsel for the petitioner-workman states that he is unable to
contact the petitioner-workman, however, he states that the settlement
which has been entered into between the parties and the document which
has been placed on record do indicate that the writ petition has been
rendered infructuous. He, however, further states that in case the
settlement which has been placed on record and the receipt thereof is not
found to be correct, liberty may be granted to the petitioner-workman to
file an appropriate application in the present writ petition.
In the light of the affidavit filed by Shri A.K. Mahajan, which
indicates the settlement between the parties and the payment of dues and
execution of receipt in acknowledgment of the money received by cheque, I
am of the opinion that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
Ordered accordingly.
However, in case the said settlement or the receipt which has
been indicated in the affidavit, has not been entered into between the
petitioner-workman and the respondent No. 2-company, liberty is granted
to the petitioner-workman to file an application in the present writ petition
in that regard.
With these observations, the present writ petition stands
disposed of.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
JUDGE
January 30,2009.
sjks.