S.S.SUDHALKAR,J. - (1.) By this writ petition, the employer is challenging the award of the Labour Court dated 17.11.1997, copy annexure P/1, vide which respondent No. 2 was found entitled to the payment of Rs. 43,913/- and interest at the rate of 12% from the date of application till 7.9.1990.
(2.) The Labour Court had passed the award on the application of the respondent under Section 33-C(2) claiming the amount of Rs. 43,913/- being difference of wages and other dues and adjustment due to the deceased husband of the respondent.
(3.) The son of the respondent i.e. Anil Kumar was appointed as Helper on 18.9.1986. The husband of respondent No. 2 i.e. Mool Chand was working as Establishment Assistant in the office of the petitioner and on the request of Mool Chand, Anil Kumar was given job on daily wages and posted in the Ledger Section. Anil Kumar died on 12.3.1990. Respondent No. 2 made claim under Section 33-C(2) of the Act and claimed wages for equal pay for equal work which, according to her, should have been given to the deceased. The matter was taken up in the Lok Adalat and it was compromised vide compromise/settlement dated 27.1.1996, copy of which has been produced at Annexure P/4. The text of the compromise is under :- "File be taken upon in Lok Adalat. Joint Statement of the parties has been recorded. The management has argued to pay Rs. 20,000/- to the workman. In view of the statement made by both the parties, the application is disposed of as settled, file be consigned to the record." It is contended by the petitioner that petitioner No. 3 sent a letter dated 29.3.1996, Annexure P/5, to respondent No. 2 that she may collect the draft from him on any working day but she did not turn up to receive the draft but had filed an application on 30.1.1996 before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court. The Labour Court held as under :- "15. It is true that this statement is signed by Shri Ashok Sangwan, General Manager on behalf of the respondent and shri G.S. Choudhary, authorised representative for Smt. Kailash Devi, claimant but the fact remains that both the parties were legally at liberty to absolve themselves from the terms and condition of the settlement. An attempt was made on behalf of the respondent Haryana Roadways to act upon the terms and conditions on this settlement when a draft was sent of Rs. 20,000/- through the registered letter but this amount was never received by the claimant and as a corollary thereto, the claimant shall be deemed to have the resiled from the terms and conditions of settlement. Needless to mention that the claimant had not signed the alleged settlement and it is doubtful if she was bound by terms and conditions of such settlement." The question to be decided is whether in view of the fact that the amount was not paid, the respondent could absolve herself of the terms and conditions of the settlement and proceed with the legal action for recovering the amount. ;