NON REPORTABLE  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4142 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP©No.16799 of 2006)

Hercules Mechanical Works & Ors. ….  Appellants

VERSUS

Wire Ropes Engineering Workers Union  …Respondent

J U D G M E N T

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of service took place on 27.10.1995 which  was  challenged  by  way  of  a  complaint,  but  the  complaint was later withdrawn.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  25(H) 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  

1

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.” (emphasis supplied)

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  

2

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.  

3

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

costs.          

   ………………………J.      [Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi;     .…………………….J. July  07, 2009.      [H.L.Dattu]    

4