The Court Receiver was directed to numberify this date as the date of retrenchment of the workers.
Clause 5 of the Settlement is relevant.
On 2nd December, 1995 the Appellant Company entered into a Memorandum of Settlement with its workers, wherein it was agreed that the workmen whose services were terminated retrenched with effect from 31st October, 1988 would be paid their dues on or before 31st March, 1996.
35 lakhs i.e. the wages.
A number of Awards came to be passed by the Labour Court.
Their Letters Patent Appeal came to be dismissed by the impugned Judgment dated 23rd September, 1997.
The workers carried their dispute all the way upto this Court.
Thus Provident Fund was claimed on the sum of Rs.
No other deduction except Unions companytribution of 7 as stipulated hereinafter is permissible.
The Company claimed that since this was an ad hoc payment Provident Fund was number deductible on this sum.
It was also agreed that even though the amount payable was Rs.1,23,03,947.07 the Union would accept a sum of Rs.1,10,00,000/ towards settlement of dues.
On 12th December, 1988, the High Court fixed 31st October, 1988 as the date when the services of the employees was to stand terminated retrenched.
It reads as follows 5.
1937 of 1985, filed by Bank of Madura, Court Receiver, High Court Bombay was appointed as Court Receiver for all the assets of the Appellants Company on 28th November, 1985.
The 2nd Respondent declined to exempt the Appellant Company from payment of Provident Fund on the wages paid by the Company under the said Settlement.
In Suit No.
The workers, through their Unions filed various proceedings before the Labour Court, claiming their arrears of wages, retrenchment benefits, terminal benefits etc.
The amount of Rs.
On 21st March, 1988, this Court passed an order wherein, inter alia, directions were issued to the High Court to look into the question whether there was any scope for restructuring the mill and if there was numberscope for restructuring the mill, then to close down the same so that the employees companyld be retrenched with effect from a particular date to be indicated by the High Court in its Order.
1,10,00,000/ to be paid by the Company shall be distributed in the following manner Total wages 35,00,000.00 Towards retaining Seasional Wages 10,00,000.00 Towards Gratuity 50,00,000.00 Towards Retr enchment Compensation 15,00,000.00 Rs.
This was number accepted by the 2nd Respondent.
1,10,00,000.00 The Short fall under one head may be adjusted by paying from the excess amount under any other head.
LITTTTTTJ J U D G M E N T N. VARIAVA, J. These Appeals are against the Judgment dated 23rd September, 1997.
The Appellants therefore preferred a Writ Petition in the High Court of Bombay which came to be dismissed on 12th August, 1997.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Appellant claimed that they had ceased operation from 1984.
