Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M.K.SASEENDRAN, S/O.LATE versus M/S.DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M.K.SASEENDRAN, S/O.LATE v. M/S.DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. - WA No. 823 of 2003 [2007] RD-KL 10468 (18 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 823 of 2003()

1. M.K.SASEENDRAN, S/O.LATE
... Petitioner

Vs

1. M/S.DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,
... Respondent

2. THE PROJECT-IN-CHARGE,

For Petitioner :SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN

For Respondent :SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR, ADDL.CGSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

Dated :18/06/2007

O R D E R

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ.


===============================
W.A. NO. 823 OF 2003
======================

Dated this the 18th day of June, 2007



J U D G M E N T

Radhakrishnan, J.

Original petition was preferred by the appellant herein seeking a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to pay arrears of Conveyance Reimbursement, Canteen Subsidy and Children Education Allowance of the period from 1.2.1998 to 30.11.2000 i.e. the period the petitioner was in service of the first respondent and to declare para 17.2 of Ext.P3 as against the provisions of Constitution of India. Learned Single Judge find no reason to grant the relief as prayed after taking note of the fact that the issue has been already settled vide Exhibit RIV settlement. The settlement binds all the workmen including the petitioner in terms of Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act and Section 18(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, irrespective of the fact that whether their union is a party to the settlement or whether they are members of the union which entered into the settlement. There is a specific clause 4.4 of Ext.RIV saying that WA 823/2003 employees who took voluntary retirement/resigned between 1.2.98 and 28.10.2001 will not be eligible for allowances like Conveyance Reimbursement/Transport Subsidy, Canteen Subsidy, Children Education Allowance, Washing allowance, Lunch Allowance to Drivers etc. Petitioner is therefore not eligible for such allowances. Learned Single Judge therefore rightly dismissed the original petition. Appeal lacks merits. Dismissed.

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.

Rp


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.