SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) GUMAN Singh, workman, has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the award dated 18.02.1985 passed by the Labour Court, Faridabad, vide which the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner, which was referred by the appropriate Government to the Labour Court, was dismissed. While observing that the dispute was compromised between the parties.
(2.) IN his petition, the petitioner has alleged that he was appointed as Turner on 01.01.1979 at a monthly salary of Rs. 609/ - by respondent No. 1. In the year 1983, he was issued a charge sheet on the allegation that he was sleeping while on duty. It was alleged that a detailed reply to the aforesaid charge sheet was given by him to the Management denying the allegations and submitting that he was feeling sick and was not sleeping while on duty. The Management, instead of holding enquiry to find out the truth of the allegation and without following the principle of natural justice and the rules and regulations of the Model Standing Orders of the Company having the statutory force, terminated the services of the petitioner on 16.06.1983, the matter was referred to the Labour Court by the appropriate Government for adjudicating the question as to whether the termination of services of the petitioner was justified or not and to what relief, he is entitled. When the aforesaid dispute was pending before the Labour Court for adjudication, on 29.01.1985, the petitioner Workman made a statement before the Labour Court that after receiving Rs. 3,700/ - he shall have no dispute with the respondent -Management and he shall have no right to reinstatement and re -employment. Then the counsel for the respondent -Management sought adjournment to bring the aforesaid amount of Rs. 3700/ -. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 18,02.1985 for bringing the bank draft by the Management for the aforesaid amount. On that date, the petitioner -workman stated that he is not ready to compromise the matter on receiving Rs. 3,700/ - and his dispute may be decided on merits. The Labour Court, instead of deciding the case on merits, has held that the industrial dispute referred to it was compromised in view of the statements made by the parties on 29.01.1985 and in view of the said compromise, the dispute has been fully settled. The said order is under challenge in the instant writ petition.
(3.) IN its written statement, the respondent Management has contended that the petitioner Workman himself made statement before the Court on 29.01.1985 and he had agreed to settle all his claims on receiving the payment of Rs. 3,700/ -. On the next date of hearing, through he refused to accept the aforesaid payment, but under the law once he had agreed to compromise the matter, then on subsequent date that there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Labour Court as under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the matter can be settled between the parties and an award made by the Labour Court on the basis of the such settlement shall be deemed to be the good award.;