Food Corporation Of India Shramik Union And ORS v. Food Corporation Of India And ANR

OD-1 ORDER SHEET WPO/1000/2022 IA NO.: GA/1/2022, GA/2/2025

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA SHRAMIK UNION AND ORS.

VS FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAI CHATTOPADHYAY Date : 6th May, 2025 Appearance:

Mr. Barnamoy Basak, Adv.

Mr. Victor Chatterjee, Adv.

...for the petitioners Mr. Kamal Kr. Chattopadhyay, Adv.

Mr. Tanjir Ali, Adv.

Ms. Rimi Chatterjee, Adv.

...for FCI The Court: Mr. Chattopadhyay, appearing for the Food Corporation of India/ respondent in the writ petition, has moved the application being GA/2/2025 filed by the said respondents.

The respondent, in the said application, has stated that by dint of a resolution of the meeting dated March 24, 2025, a settlement has been arrived at between the Union and the Food Corporation of India, so far as this writ petition is concerned (WPO/1000/2022). Copy has been served.

Mr. Barnamoy Basak appears on behalf of the petitioners. He, however, informs that the petitioner no. 5, namely, Subhas Mallick, has raised objection as to the terms of settlement so arrived at by the Union with

the management of the respondent Food Corporation of India. So far as the said writ petitioner is concerned, he seeks that the writ petition may be disposed of on merit.

Having heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and after perusing the records, the Court is of the opinion that a meeting was held between the parties on March 24, 2025 to end in settlement with certain terms and conditions, where the Joint Secretary, FCISU, Executive Member, FCISU and Organizing Secretary, FCISU have resolved the dispute with the management, pursuant to those terms and conditions, unanimously accepted by the respondent and the Union. Therefore, the Court finds it proper to dispose of this writ petition excepting as regards the cause of action of the writ petitioner no. 5, Subhas Mallick, in terms of the settlement as arrived at between the parties on March 24, 2025.

Accordingly, WPO/1000/2022 is disposed of, excepting for the petitioner no. 5.

Interim orders, as were earlier granted in this case, should be treated as vacated excepting against the petitioner no. 5, Subhas Mallick. (RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, J.) sg.