Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 2958 (MAD)

R. Ramamurthi & Others v. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Others

2007-09-11

M.CHOCKALINGAM

body2007
Judgment :- This order shall govern these three writ petitions viz. W.P.Nos.253 to 255 of 2006 2. These writ petitions have been filed praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents from interfering in any manner with the concluded settlements arrived at under Section 18(1) Settlement of the Industrial Disputes Act between the petitioners in each case and the erstwhile Managements by Elected Board of Directors of the second respondent in respective cases. 3. The affidavits filed in support of the petition is perused. 4. The only grievance ventilated by the petitioners is that the petitioners are employed in the respondent bank. Pursuant to the settlement made under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, there pay scale have been fixed and they are getting the revised pay for the past several years. While the matter stood thus, the second respondent passed orders revising the pay scale pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.131 dated 6. 1999. Now according to the counsel, once the settlement had been entered into between the parties and the pay scale has been fixed and it has been acted upon, no question of revising the pay, even without notice or enquiry would arise. 5. The Court heard the learned counsel for the respondents. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that once the settlement has been arrived at between the parties under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and it has also been acted upon and revised payment has been made, no question of revision of pay without notice or enquiry and if it is allowed, it would be nothing but offending the principles of natural justice. In view of the above, the respondents are hereby forbeared not to interfere with the settlement arrived under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act between the petitioners and the Management. It is made clear that the respondent can serve notice upon the petitioners giving opportunity to put forth their case and pass orders accordingly. 7. With the above observation, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, WP.MP.NOS. 304 TO 306 OF 2006 AND WV.MP.No.138 OF 2007 are closed.