Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

The Management Of vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Labour on 4 November, 2024

Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

                                                                           WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 04.11.2024

                                                       CORAM:

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHACHAKRAVARTHY


                                        Writ Petition Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014
                                                           and
                                                 MP Nos.1 & 1 of 2014


                W.P.No.10019 of 2014

                The Management of
                The Lakshmi Mills Company Limited
                Palladam Branch
                K.N.Puram,
                Palladam 641 662
                rep. by its
                Vice President -Operations                                        ... Petitioner


                                                        versus


                1. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour,
                   Appellate Authority under the Tamil Nadu
                   Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act
                   Dr. Balasundaram Salai,
                   Coimbatore - 18.

                2. The Assistant Commissioner Labour
                   Controlling Authority under the Tamil Nadu
                   Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act
                   Dr. Balasundaram Salai,
                   Coimbatore - 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                1/8
                                                                      WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014

          3. C.Arumugham (PSA No.25/10)

          4. A.Raju (PSA No.26/10)

          5. R. Kamalaselvan (PSA No.27/10)

          6. C. Kumarakannan (PSA No.28/10)

          7. P. Naventhiran (PSA No.29/10)

          8. M.Shanmugham (PSA No.30/10)

          9. R.Devadoss (PSA No.31/10)

          10. P.Saravanakumar (PSA No.32/10)                         .. Respondents


                   Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying

          to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 1st respondent in APSA

          No.2 of 2013 and quash its order dated 24.02.2014 confirming the order of the

          2nd respondent dated 18.12.2012 in PSA Nos.25/10 to 32/10.

          W.P.No.10020 of 2014

                The Management of
                The Lakshmi Mills Company Limited,
                Palladam Branch,
                K.N.Puram,
                Palladam 641 662
                rep.by its Vice President Operations                 ... Petitioner

                                             /Vs./

          1          The Deputy Commissioner of Labour
                     Appellate Authority Under The Tamilnadu
                     Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act
                     Dr.Balasundaram Salai, Coimbatore 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


          2/8
                                                                  WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014



                2     The Assistant Commissioner Labour
                      Controlling Authority Under The Tamilnadu
                      Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act
                      Dr.Balasundaram Salai , Coimbatore 18

                3     M. Shanmugham (PSA.No. 12 /11)

                4     T.Rajendran (PSA.no. 13 /11)

                5     S. Viswanathan (PSA.No. 14 /11)

                6     V.Rajasekar (PSA.No. 15 /11)

                7     N. Veerasamy (PSA.No. 16 /11)

                8     K.Selvaraj (PSA.No. 17 /11)

                9     N.Sakthivel (PSA.No. 18 /11)

                10 P.Udhayakumar (PSA No. 19 /11)

                11 S.Sivakumar (PSA.No. 20 /11)

                12 R.Mahendran (PSA.No.21 /11)

                13 K.Balakrishnan (PSA.No. 22 /11)

                14 R.Sureshkumar (PSA.No.23/11)

                15 L.Malayandi (PSA.No.24/11)

                16 D.Ravichandran (PSA.No.25 /11)

                17 P.Naventhiran (PSA.No.26 /11)

                18 R.Kamalaselvan(PSA.No.27 /11)

                19 A.Raju (PSA.No.28 /11)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                3/8
                                                                              WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014

                20 V. Selvaraj (PSA.No.29 /11)

                21 A.Ponnusamy (PSA.No.30 /11)

                22 K.Chandrasekar (PSA.No.31 /11)

                23 P.Velusamy (PSA.No.32 /11)

                24 R.Devadoss (PSA.No.33 /11)

                25 P.Palaniswamy (PSA.No.34 /11)

                26 C.Kumarakannan (PSA.No.35 /11)

                27 S.Olimuthu (PSA.No. 36 /11)

                28 A.Shanmugham (PSA.No.37 /11)

                29 N.Sankaralingam (PSA.No.38 /11)

                30 V.Jestinraj (PSA.No.39 /11)

                31 C.Arumugham (PSA.No. 40 /11)
                                                                       .... Respondents


                           Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
                to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent in APSA
                NO.1 of 2013 and quash its order dated 24.2.2014 confirming the order of the
                2nd respondent dated 28.11.2012 in PSA Nos. 12/11 to 40/11.



                          For Petitioner                  :     Ms S.B.Keerthana
                          in both W.Ps.                         for M/s.T.S.Gopalan and Co.

                          For Respondents                 :     Mr. K.Tamilvendan
                          in both W.Ps.                         Government Advocate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                4/8
                                                                              WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014



                                               COMMON ORDER


When these writ petitions came up for hearing, a memo is filed on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, which reads as follows:

W.P.No.10019 of 2014
" The writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.02.2014 passed under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowances Act, 1981 in favur of 08 workmen. The petitioner states that out of the total 08 workmen except for respondent no.5 all the others have settled the dispute with the petitioner and the settlements have been filed with the supporting documents for approval. The respondent No.3 has till date not approached the petitioner claiming any relief in terms of the impugned order and in fact have not appeared before this Hon'ble Court.
The petitioner may hence be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to restore if the respondent no.3 comes forward to make any claim in future in terms of the order impugned ."

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/8 WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014 W.P.No.10020 of 2014 " The writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.02.2014 passed under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowances Act, 1981 in favur of 29 workmen. The petitioner states that out of the total 29 workmen except for respondent no.12, 13, 14, 18, 23, 27 and 29 all the others have settled the dispute with the petitioner and the settlements have been filed with the supporting documents for approval. The 7 respondents have till date not approached the petitioner claiming any relief in terms of the impugned order and in fact have not appeared before this Hon'ble Court.

The petitioner may hence be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to restore if the 7 respondents come forward to make any claim in future in terms of the order impugned ."

2. None appears on behalf of the workmen concerned. Since it is now clear from the memo filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in both the writ petitions that except respondent no.5 and except respondent nos.12, 13, 14, 18, 23, 27 & 29 respectively, all the others have settled the dispute with the petitioner and the said respondent no.5 and except respondent nos.12, 13, 14, 18, 23, 27 & 29 are not coming forward and approaching the management inspite of the efforts of the management.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/8 WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014

3. Recording the said memos, these writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn by giving liberty to the management to restore the writ petitions as prayed for in the memo, in case, the respondent no.5 in W.P.No.10019 of 2014 and respondent nos. 12, 13, 14, 18, 23, 27 & 29 do not approach them for settlement, but however choose to contest the matter.

04.11.2024 Neutral Citation : No mrp To

1. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Appellate Authority under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act Dr. Balasundaram Salai, Coimbatore - 18.

2. The Assistant Commissioner Labour Controlling Authority under the Tamil Nadu Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act Dr. Balasundaram Salai, Coimbatore - 18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/8 WP Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

mrp W.P.Nos.10019 & 10020 of 2014 04.11.2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/8