WA/1087/2026 of R.Prasath Vs The Management of K.Sivasubramaniam Spinner (Pvt) on 9 September 2026

Common Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) Challenging the order dated 01.04.2025 passed in W.P.Nos.12282 & W.P.No.12279 of 2019, the present Writ Appeals have been preferred by the appellants.

2. Heard the appellants, party-in-person and the learned counsel for the respondent Management.

3. The appellants herein were employed as Operative Assistants under the Management of M/s.Sivasubraminam Spinner Private Ltd., since 1996. When the Management announced “Voluntary Retirement Scheme” to reduce its working strength, there was opposition by the Labour Union leading to disciplinary proceedings against these appellants and another. After the disciplinary proceedings, the appellants were dismissed from service on 01.08.2006 which paved way to raise a dispute before the Labour Court, Coimbatore in I.D.No.568 of 2008 by R.Prasath, the appellant in W.A.1087 of 2026 and I.D. No.567 of 2008 by K.Soundararajan, the appellant in W.A.No.1088 of 2026. The Labour Court, Coimbatore after considering the evidence let in on either side by way of documents marked as Ex.W1 to

WA No. 1087 of 2026

Ex.W10 and Ex.M1 to Ex.M56, passed a preliminary Award holding that the enquiry conducted was not in a fair and proper manner and the findings are perverse. The Labour Court also recorded that the action taken by the Management is deliberate and malicious one. Thereafter, the Management had adduced evidence to prove the charges. In the proceedings, 19 documents were marked on behalf of the workmen and 44 documents were marked on behalf of the Management. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the delay on the part of the workmen to knock the doors of justice, the Labour Court awarded reinstatement into service with continuity of service and attendant benefits within one month from the date of the Award with 25% back wages.

4. Aggrieved by the said Award, the Management has filed the Writ Petitions in W.P.No.12282 of 2019 as against Prasath and W.P.No.12279 of 2019 as against Mr.K.Soundararajan. Both the writ petitions were taken up together and disposed of on 01.04.2025 in view of the consent given by both the parties. As per the consent, the Management was directed to pay a sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the appellants herein as compensation towards full and final satisfaction within a period of eight weeks.

5. The said order passed by consent is challenged by the workmen Prasath and Soundararajan in the present Writ Appeals on specific allegations that the

WA No. 1087 of 2026

amount settled by the Management was not towards full satisfaction and the Management has to pay Gratuity and Provident Fund amount which they were legally entitled to, in addition also entitled for more compensation amount in addition to the amount received and therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Judge has to be set aside.

6. When the Writ Appeals came up for admission, we enquired the learned counsel appeared for the appellants whether the agreed amount of Rs.10 lakhs each was received by the appellants. The learned counsel admitted that the amount was paid and received, but the amount was not within the period of eight (8) weeks time as stipulated by this Court. The counsel for the Management submitted that there was a short delay in paying the amount agreed. Hence, the Management took permission of the Court for extension of time to comply with the order. The petitioners agreed for extension of time and received the money towards full quit and settlement.

7. Hence, we told the learned counsel if at all to entertain the Writ Appeals, the appellants has to deposit the compensation amount received by them pursuant to the compromise and on deposit of the said amount, the merits of the writ appeals will be considered thereafter. The learned counsel took adjournment to consult with the parties and report back the status before this Court. Again when the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned

WA No. 1087 of 2026

counsel who has entered appearance for the appellants has withdrawn his appearance and the appellants namely, Prasath and Soundararajan are present before us today. The letter given by Prasath to the Labour Court, Coimbatore on 03.11.2025 was produced by him to show that he is withdrawing his application seeking Gratuity and Provident Fund in view of the pendency of the review petitions in WP.12279 & 12282 of 2019. Apparently this letter was given by the appellant /Prasath when his review petition against the order passed by the learned Single Judge was pending. From the record, we find that the review petition was closed at the SR stage itself and only thereafter, the present Writ Appeals have been preferred by the appellants. The learned Single Judge on being satisfied with the statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the Management, as well as the workmen, who appeared in person, had recorded the terms of compromise and disposed of the Writ Petitions. Admittedly, the workmen have received the money without any protest at the time of receiving the money and now they have turned their view to re-agitate the issue. Therefore, on equity and on all fairness they have to deposit the money which they are not inclined to do. When this Court repeatedly asked the appellants, who are before us as party-in-person, they said that the money received by them was spent for their domestic expenses. This cannot be a reason to re-agitate a cause which was settled by consent. The present appeals have been filed with a oblique motive and design to extract more money from the Management. Therefore, we hold these Writ Appeals

WA No. 1087 of 2026

filed without any merit liable to be dismissed with costs.

8. When we were about to impose costs, the appellants, who are present here submitted that the Provident Fund Contribution made by them was not paid to them and they are entitled for that dehors of the settlement. The learned counsel for the Management states that the settlement arrived at pending Writ Petitions will not be of any impediment for the workmen to get their Provident fund contribution and if any application is made, the Management will assist them for getting their Provident Fund Contribution from the Provident Fund Organisation. Recording the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the respondent Management, we dismiss the Writ Appeals however without costs. (G.J.,J.) (E.M.,J.) 09-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No DP

WA No. 1087 of 2026

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN J. AND E.MANOHARAN J. DP WA No. 1087 of 2026 and WA No. 1088 of 2026 09-09-2026