← Library
Madras High CourtWP/10376/2026dismissed

S.Parthasarathi, v. The Management,

2026-04-20Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani11 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 10376 of 2026, WP NO. 42613 OF 2025, WP NO. 42611 OF 2025 AND WMP NO. 11238 OF 2026 WP No. 10376 of 2026 S.Parthasarathi ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Management, M/s.Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd, (Foundry Division), Arasur, Coimbatore-641407 ..Respondent(s) WP No. 42613 of 2025 K.Ravi ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Management M/s.Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd.

(Foundry Division), Arasur, Coimabtore-641 407.

2. The Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore District Court Complex, Coimbatore-641 018.

..Respondent(s)

WP No. 42611 of 2025 D. Kumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Management M/s.Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd.

(Foundry Division), Arasur, Coimabtore-641 407.

2. The Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore District Court Complex, Coimbatore-641 018.

..Respondent(s) Prayer in WP No. 10376 of 2026 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in ID.No.72/2016 passed by the Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore, dated 29.03.2022 and to quash the award and to direct the respondent herein to reinstate the petitioner in the respondent company with continuity of service with all attendant benefits including back wages. Prayer in WP No. 42613 of 2025 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records from the 2nd respondent in ID No.80/2016 and to quash the award dated 29.03.2022 and to direct the 1st respondent / management herein to reinstate the petitioner in the 1st respondent company with continuity of service with all attendant benefits including back wages.

Prayer in WP No. 42611 of 2025 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records from the 2nd respondent in ID No.74/2016 and to quash the award dated 29.03.2022 and to direct the 1st respondent / management herein to reinstate the petitioner in the 1st respondent company with continuity of service with all attendant benefits including back wages.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Saravanakumar in all writ petitions For Respondent(s):

Mr.Sanjay Mohan for M/s.Ramasubramanian Associates for R1 in all writ petitions COMMON ORDER Challenging the Award of the Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore, dated 29.03.2022, in I.D.No.72 of 2016, W.P.No.10376 of 2026 has been filed. Challenging the Common Award of the Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore, dated 29.03.2022, in I.D.Nos.74 and 80 of 2016, W.P.Nos.42611 and 42613 of 2025 respectively have been filed. All these writ petitions have been filed as against the orders of the Labour Court dismissing the Industrial Disputes raised by the petitioners on the ground that there is no employer-employee relationship between the petitioner and the 1st respondent Management.

2.Brief facts of the case are as follows :

2.1.The petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611 of 2025 joined in the 1st respondent as Workman on 01.07.1993, 19.07.1993 and 01.12.1992 respectively and served for more than 21 years and the last drawn salary of the petitioners was Rs.31,000/-, Rs.26,000/- and Rs.23,000/- per month respectively. While so, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611 of 2025 were informed by the Manager of the 1st respondent Company that they were transferred from Arasur Unit to Periyanaickenpalayam Unit on 11.07.2014, 22.01.2014 and 10.02.2014 respectively and they were asked to get clearance from all the Departments and they were instructed to join duty in the Periyanaickenpalayam Unit on 01.08.2014, 02.02.2014 and 01.03.2014 respectively. They were handed over cheques by the Management as under :

Petitioner in Cheque Amount For the period W.P.No.10376 of 2026 Rs.7,37,071/- (2 Cheques) 15.07.2014 to 08.10.2014 W.P.No.42613 of 2025 Rs.6,83,067/- (3 Cheques) 26.02.2014 to 08.10.2014 W.P.No.42611 of 2025 Rs.6,98,007/- (3 Cheques) 27.02.2014 to 08.10.2014 2.2.The petitioners did not know the intention of the respondent Management and the petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611

of 2025 reported for duty before the Periyanaickenpalayam Unit on 01.08.2014, 02.02.2014 and 01.03.2014 respectively. However, the petitioners were denied work continuously and they were informed that their labour services were not needed by the 1st respondent. Therefore, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611 of 2025 sent notices on 20.08.2015, 02.03.2016 and 20.08.2015, from the reply to which, the petitioners came to know that they were terminated from service.

2.3.Therefore, the petitioners raised an Industrial Dispute under Section 2(A)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before the Labour Officer, Coimbatore, against their illegal termination. However, the conciliation failed on 25.07.2016. Against the same, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611 of 2025 filed Industrial Disputes in I.D.Nos.72 of 2016, 80 of 2016 and 74 of 2016 respectively before the 2nd respondent/Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore. The Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore, by the impugned Common Award dated 29.03.2022, dismissed the Industrial Disputes filed by the petitioners, holding that there is no employee-employer relationship between the petitioners and the 1st respondent Management. 2.4.Challenging the Award of the Principal Labour Court, the petitioners have filed the above writ petitions.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners, under the guise of transfer to other Unit, were made to sign on blank papers, which were used for filling up the application for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS). It is his further contention that, even though the petitioners initially refused to receive the cheques, the 1st respondent Management compelled the petitioners to receive the cheques and gave the cheques to them. At the time of handing over the cheques, the Management had obtained signatures in typed documents which the petitioners/workmen could not understand.

It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 1st respondent Management has not followed the legal procedure for terminating the employees/workmen and hence, the termination as well as the impugned Award of the Labour Court have to be set aside. The learned counsel would submit that, after the dismissal, the petitioners/workmen are struggling for their livelihood and hence, the 1st respondent Management may be directed to reinstate the petitioners with continuity of services and backwages. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent Management would submit that, due to recession, the 1st respondent Management announced a VRS Scheme on 22.01.2014 and based on the same, 25 workmen opted for the Scheme including the petitioners in W.P.Nos.

42613 of 2015 and 42611 of 2015 by submitting their resignation letters on 23.01.

and 10.02.2014 respectively. Even after the closure of the Scheme, the petitioner in W.P.No.10376 of 2026 approached the Management expressing his desire to resign the job by submitting his resignation letter on 11.07.2014. The resignation letters submitted by the petitioners in W.P.Nos.10376 of 2026, 42613 and 42611 of 2025 were accepted by the Management and they were relieved from service by the Management on 11.07.2014, 24.01.2014 and 11.02.2014 respectively. Further, it is his contention that the petitioners have received all their benefits including Gratuity. Hence, the learned counsel would contend that there is no employer-employee relationship that exists between the petitioners and the 1st respondent Company even at the time of filing the Industrial Disputes. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners, having voluntarily resigned from the jobs and having received all the monetary benefits including ex gratia, cannot have any claim against the respondent Company. Therefore, the learned counsel would pray for dismissal of these writ petitions.

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the entire materials available on record.

6.It is the main contention of the petitioners that, under the guise of transfer, the petitioners were insisted to sign blank/unfilled forms and based on the same, they have been illegally terminated from service. The petitioners

have contested their case before the Labour Court by adducing oral and documentary evidence. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that, after a full fledged trial, the Labour Court, on a detailed appreciation of the entire oral and documentary evidence, has disbelieved the contention of the petitioners that they have signed blank forms. The Labour Court has factually found that the petitioners have admitted that they have voluntarily tendered their resignation. The Labour Court has further found that the petitioners have entered into 18(1) settlement with the 1st respondent Management and have received all the monetary benefits including Gratuity and ex gratia. It is found that the petitioner in W.P.No.10376 of 2026 has received Gratuity payment of Rs.1,61,010/- and other legal dues by way of cheque for a sum of Rs.5,36,66.

26 and he has raised an Industrial Dispute after a lapse of 13 months. The petitioner in W.P.No.42613 of 2025 has received the Gratuity payment of Rs.1,64,904/-; VRS Compensation of Rs.4,94,712/- and legal dues of Rs.37,000/-. The petitioner in W.P.No.42611 of 2025 has received Gratuity payment of Rs.1,62,818/-; VRS Compensation of Rs.5,02,251.94 and legal dues of Rs.38,012/-. After receipt of the amounts, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.42613 and 42611 of 2025 have sent the letters for reinstatement after a lapse of 18 months. Therefore, the Labour Court has rightly found that there is no employer-employee relationship between the petitioners and the 1st respondent Management.

after 18(1) settlement with the employer, now cannot turn around and come forward with a new version when the same has already been negatived by the trial Court after elaborate discussion and appreciation of evidence. Therefore, this Court finds no merit in these writ petitions and the impugned Awards do not warrant any interference. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. 7.However, considering the plight of the petitioners, liberty is granted to the petitioners to make a representation to the 1st respondent Management for providing fresh employment within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representations, the 1st respondent shall consider the request of the petitioners, if possible, and pass appropriate orders. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

20-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RLI

To

1. The Principal Judge, Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore District Court Complex, Coimbatore-641 018.

2. The Management, M/s.Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd., (Foundry Division), Arasur, Coimabtore-641 407.

M.DHANDAPANI J.

RLI WP No. 10376 of 2026, WP NO. 42613 OF 2025 & WP NO. 42611 OF 2025 20-04-2026