Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Hercules Mechanical Works and ors. Vs. Wire Ropes Engineering Workers Union

Hercules Mechanical Works and ors. vs Wire Ropes Engineering Workers Union

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Jul 07, 2009
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/669535

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Civil Appeal No. 4142 of 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 16799 of 2006)
Subject
Labour and Industrial

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - In the instant case, at best, the respondent can plead violation of Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act. On failure of deposit of any of the instalments, this appeal shall stand dismissed and the order of the courts below shall stand affirmed.

Key legal issue
Labour and Industrial
Acts & sections
Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 25H

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hercules Mechanical Works and ors.

Respondent

Wire Ropes Engineering Workers Union

Legal References

Acts
Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 25H
Reported In
JT2009(9)SC281; 2009(9)SCALE337

Excerpt

- - in the instant case, at best, the respondent can plead violation of section 25h of the industrial disputes act. on failure of deposit of any of the instalments, this appeal shall stand dismissed and the order of the courts below shall stand affirmed......was made, fresh notice be issued to the respondent to intimate that a sum of rs. 25,000/- was already deposited to meet the legal expenses and that he should enter appearance to contest the matter, if so advised. subsequent to this order, mr. abhay chandrakant mahimkar with ms. asha g.nair, learned counsel appeared for the respondent-workmen. as noted herein earlier, this matter was adjourned from time to time for arriving at a proper settlement. finally, the matter came up for hearing and the parties had agreed that the appellant-management shall pay a total sum of rs. 3 lacs in full satisfaction to the workmen by six equal instalments. since this is agreed upon by the parties, we dispose of this appeal in the following manner.3. on deposit of payment of rs. 3 lacs to the workman, disputes between the parties shall finally dissolved and the workmen shall not press for reinstatement of his services or for payment of back wages. this amount shall be paid by six monthly equal instalments, the first of such payment shall be made by 15th of july, 2009 to the concerned workman and thereafter shall go on paying every month within 15th of each succeeding month till the entire amount, as directed herein above, is paid to the workmen. on failure of deposit of any of the instalments, this appeal shall stand dismissed and the order of the courts below shall stand affirmed. we also make it clear that if the amount is paid in the manner indicated above, the respondent shall not press for reinstatement in service or shall not press for any other claim whatsoever.4. the appeal is thus disposed of. there will be no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

Tarun Chatterjee, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. On 19th of October, 2006, this Court issued notice in the following manner:

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the original termination of service took place on 27.10.1995 which was challenged by way of a complaint, but the complaint was later withdrawn. In the instant case, at best, the respondent can plead violation of Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act. The case of the petitioners is that the concerned workman had been invited to work but he refused to work and thereafter a letter was issued informing him that if he did not join his duties, someone else may be employed in his place. Counsel for the petitioners submits that despite this the Labour Court has proceeded on the basis that there was an unfair labour practice and therefore granted relief to the workman. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have no objection to giving employment to the workman but in any event he should not be granted back wages. Issue notice. In the meantime, there shall be stay of payment of back wages.

From a reading of the aforesaid order of this Court, it would be evident that inspite of directions made by the Management to the respondent-workman to join his duties, but he had refused to join, whereas the case of the workmen was that he was not allowed to join his duties. For the purpose of settling the disputes between the parties in this appeal, we have adjourned the matter for settlement several times. However, it appears from the order of this Court dated 20th of April, 2007 that a direction was made at the instance of the Management to deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- in the Registry of this Court and a further direction was made in that order that since the deposit was made, fresh notice be issued to the respondent to intimate that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- was already deposited to meet the legal expenses and that he should enter appearance to contest the matter, if so advised. Subsequent to this order, Mr. Abhay Chandrakant Mahimkar with Ms. Asha G.Nair, learned Counsel appeared for the respondent-workmen. As noted herein earlier, this matter was adjourned from time to time for arriving at a proper settlement. Finally, the matter came up for hearing and the parties had agreed that the appellant-Management shall pay a total sum of Rs. 3 lacs in full satisfaction to the workmen by six equal instalments. Since this is agreed upon by the parties, we dispose of this appeal in the following manner.

3. On deposit of payment of Rs. 3 lacs to the workman, disputes between the parties shall finally dissolved and the workmen shall not press for reinstatement of his services or for payment of back wages. This amount shall be paid by six monthly equal instalments, the first of such payment shall be made by 15th of July, 2009 to the concerned workman and thereafter shall go on paying every month within 15th of each succeeding month till the entire amount, as directed herein above, is paid to the workmen. On failure of deposit of any of the instalments, this appeal shall stand dismissed and the order of the courts below shall stand affirmed. We also make it clear that if the amount is paid in the manner indicated above, the respondent shall not press for reinstatement in service or shall not press for any other claim whatsoever.

4. The appeal is thus disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial