Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 1359 of 2008
PETITIONER:
M/s. Bihar Caustic and Chemical Ltd
RESPONDENT:
Lallandeo Singh
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/02/2008
BENCH:
ASHOK BHAN & DALVEER BHANDARI
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1359 OF 2008
[Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No.11109 of 2006]
Leave granted.
The respondent was working as a security guard. While he was on duty, the Managing
Director of the appellant-company was assaulted by three workers. The respondent failed
to take any preventive action against the miscreants. Consequently, a charge-sheet was
issued against the respondent for the said act of misconduct. Since the respondent refused
to accept the charge-sheet, another charge-sheet was issued against him. He tendered his
reply to the first charge-sheet. The explanation offered by him was not found satisfactory
and a domestic enquiry was held against him. He was found guilty of misconduct. On the
basis of the findings of the enquiry officer, the respondent was dismissed.
Action had been taken against the respondent in an earlier case. Hence, he raised a
n
industrial dispute and the reference was pending before the Industrial Tribunal. The
Management filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act
1947 seeking approval of the action of
C.A.No.1360/08 .... (Contd.)
- 2 -
dismissal taken against the respondent for not preventing the miscreants from assaulting
the Managing Director. The Industrial Tribunal dismissed the application thereby
declining the approval of the action taken by the appellant.
Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Cou
rt
which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge. The Management thereafter filed a Letters
Patent Appeal.
During the pendency of the Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A.No.847 of 2003, a
settlement was arrived at between the Management and the workman and an application,
viz., I.A.No.1072 of 2004 in LPA No.847 of 2003 was filed by the appellant seeking
disposal of the LPA in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. It was state
d
in the application that a sum of Rs.4,65,000/- had been paid to the respondent-workman
vide two cheques, namely, Cheque No.671163 dated 15.5.2004 for an amount of
Rs.4,29,285/- and Cheque No.620597 of the same date for an amount of Rs.35,715/-
drawable at State Bank of India, Rehla thus making a total of Rs.4,65,000/- towards
provident fund dues. The Division Bench, however, without taking note of the application
for settlement, disposed of the LPA by affirming the order of the learned Single Judge.
The said order is in challenge before us.
Notice was issued in the matter on 07th July 2006. However, counter affidavit has
not
been filed in the matter so
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
C.A.No.1360/08 .... (Contd.)
- 3 -
far. It seems that the respondent-workman has not filed the counter affidavit because of
the settlement arrived at between the parties.
In view of the fact that a settlement has already been arrived at between the partie
s
which is not controverted by either of the parties, we set aside the order passed by the
Division Bench of the High Court and hold that the appeal before the High Court shall be
deemed to have been disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties,
the terms of which are mentioned in I.A. No.1072 of 2004 in L.P.A.No.847 of 2003.
The appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.