WA/903/2016 of SRI SHIVANANDAIAH Vs THE MANAGEMENT OF HINDUSTAN on 28 July 2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The Writ Appeal No.862/2016 has been filed by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (for brevity 'the HPCL'), whereas Writ Appeal No.903/2016 has been filed by the workmen, impugning the common judgment and order dated 08.03.2016 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.503/2007 (L-TER) C/w W.P.No.4084/2007(L-TER).

2. On the last date of posting i.e., on 15.07.2026 this Court passed the following order :-

HC-KAR

"Having considered the life of litigation i.e., almost 30 years by the poor workmen seeking enforcement of their rights of continuation in service and regularization, till date they have not got the fruits of litigation, despite having been succeeded before the Industrial Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge. To put an end and give quietus to the long pending litigation, we suggest a figure of Rs.12,00,000/- to be paid to each workmen/ dependents of the deceased workmen. Mr.V.S.Naik, on instruction, has agreed to take the offer towards full and final settlement of all rights claimed and entitlement of the workmen. Smt.H.R.Renuka, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ Company submits that, she will put this suggestion/ offer to the Management and she will get back about the offer on the next date of posting. We make it clear that there is no scope for any bargain by the appellant/ Company. This is a final offer, which has been made by the Court and accepted by the respondents/ workmen. We hope that the Management of the Company would be wise enough to take the offer to give a quietus to the long pending litigation. Post this appeal on 28.07.2026."

HC-KAR

3. We are glad to note that the appellant/HPCL has accepted suggestion of this Court and has agreed to pay Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs only) to each of the workmen i.e., respondents/legal heirs in case where the workman is no more.

4. The person, who is claiming for the deceased workman is required to file Indemnity Bond inasmuch as he/she has to indemnify the HPCL for the payment of Rs.12,00,000/-. We have been informed that one Smt. Sarasamma W/o Late Venkatesh, respondent No.3, who is no more, is claiming the amount which would have been paid to her husband, if he was otherwise alive. We therefore, direct her to file Indemnity Bond to indemnifying the payment to be received by her from the HPCL.

5. The parties have filed the terms of settlement in a joint memo signed by the Deputy General Manager/Authorized representative of the HPCL and constituted attorney of HPCL as well as legal heir of the deceased workman. The parties have been duly identified by their respective counsel. The workmen and the legal representatives, who are present in the Court have stated that the terms of settlement have been signed by

HC-KAR

them without there being any undue influence, force, coercion or misrepresentation, out of their free will and they would abide by the said terms of the settlement. The terms of settlement filed in the joint memo would read as under :- "JOINT MEMO "The parties to the proceedings above named have agreed to settle the case, hence the order of the Learned Single Judge dated 8.3.2016 in W.P.No.503/2007 c/w W.P.No.4084/2007 and the award passed by the central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Bangalore in C.R.No.178/1997 c/w Complaint 1/05 to dated 26.09.2006 (Annexure L in W.A.No.862/2016) may kindly be modified as under: TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

1. The appellant corporation to pay the respondents (8 in number) a lumpsum of Twelve lakhs (12 lakhs) each, in full and final settlement of their claims and the respondents are not entitled to any other claim whatsoever from the appellants except lumpsum of Rs. 12 lakhs each.

2. The respondents have agreed to receive lumpsum of Twelve lakhs each (Rs. 12 lakhs) in full and final settlement of their claims against the appellant corporation.

HC-KAR

3. The 3rd respondent workman namely Venkatesh since deceased is represented by his sole legal representative namely Smt. Sarasamma - she undertakes to indemnify against any claim if made on behalf of any other legal representative of the deceased Venkatesh who are not party to the proceedings.

4. The appellant corporation undertakes to pay the amount to the respondents as agreed above, with deduction of admissible income tax if any, within three months from the date of receipt of the order."

6. We make it clear that this lump sum amount is to be paid within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Payment by the HPCL to the workmen is the capital receipt and would not be subjected to the income tax deduction or payment inasmuch as it is for their long past services.

7. We therefore, dispose of these appeals in terms of the conditions stipulated in the joint memo.

8. We make it clear that the workmen will produce all the required documents as have been communicated by Smt.H.R. Renuka, learned counsel for the to Sri.V.S. Naik, learned counsel.

HC-KAR

9. The Management should co-operate with the workmen, to enable them receive the PF if any, due to them.

10. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

NG CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13