Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Burroughs Wellcome (I) Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Industrial Court which dismissed its application for dismissal of a complaint filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3, who were workmen employed by the petitioner. The petitioner had floated a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) on 17th June 2003, and the respondents accepted the scheme, executing letters expressly declaring that they shall have no claim or any benefit that may arise out of any dispute pending now or that may be raised in future at any forum. Despite this, the respondents sought to continue with a pending complaint filed under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The petitioner applied to the Industrial Court for dismissal of the complaint, but the Industrial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the matter was controversial and needed to be decided on merit. The High Court held that the Industrial Court erred in its approach. The court noted that the respondents had voluntarily accepted the VRS benefits with a clear declaration waiving all future claims, including those arising from pending disputes. Therefore, they were estopped from continuing with the complaint. The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the Industrial Court's order, and directed the dismissal of the complaint.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Voluntary Retirement Scheme - Waiver of Rights - Employees who accept VRS benefits with an express declaration that they shall have no claim arising out of any pending or future dispute cannot continue with a pending complaint under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 - The Industrial Court erred in dismissing the company's application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the matter is controversial and needs to be decided on merit - Held that the employees are estopped from pursuing the complaint after accepting VRS benefits with a full and final settlement (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether employees who have availed benefits under a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) by expressly declaring that they shall have no claim or any benefit that may arise out of any dispute pending now or that may be raised in future at any forum, can insist on continuing with the pending complaint filed by them under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the order of the Industrial Court dated 12th July 2005, and directed that the complaint filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 be dismissed.
Law Points
- Voluntary Retirement Scheme
- estoppel
- waiver
- MRTU & PULP Act
- 1971
- Industrial Court jurisdiction
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (07) 216
Writ Petition No.668 of 2004
Mr. P.K. Rele, senior advocate with Vinod Tayade & R.P. Rele i/b. Piyush Shah for petitioner; Mr. Shailesh S. Pathak, advocate with T.R. Yadav for respondents
M/s. Burroughs Wellcome (I) Ltd.
Jagannath Namdeo Patel, Manish Govind Mohite, D.C. Chavarkar, Smt. S.V. Ayarekar (Member, Industrial Court)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of Industrial Court dismissing application for dismissal of complaint under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner company sought dismissal of complaint filed by respondent workmen who had accepted VRS benefits with a declaration waiving all claims.
Filing Reason
Industrial Court dismissed the company's application for dismissal of complaint on the ground that the matter is controversial and needs to be decided on merit.
Previous Decisions
Industrial Court dismissed the application for dismissal of complaint.
Issues
Whether employees who have availed VRS benefits with an express declaration waiving all claims can continue with a pending complaint under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the respondents, having accepted VRS benefits with a declaration that they shall have no claim arising out of any pending or future dispute, are estopped from continuing with the complaint.
Respondents argued that the matter is controversial and needs to be decided on merit.
Ratio Decidendi
Employees who voluntarily accept benefits under a Voluntary Retirement Scheme with an express declaration that they shall have no claim arising out of any pending or future dispute are estopped from continuing with a pending complaint under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The Industrial Court erred in dismissing the company's application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the matter is controversial.
Judgment Excerpts
The short point raised in this petition is, whether the employees who have availed the benefits under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) by expressly declaring that they shall have no claim or any benefit that may arise out of any dispute pending now or that may be raised in future at any forum, can insist on continuing with the pending complaint filed by them under the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 ?
In the present case, the application made by the company for dismissal of pending complaint filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 who have availed the benefits under the VRS has been dismissed by the Industrial Court on the ground that the matter is controversial and needs to be decided on merit.
Procedural History
The respondent workmen filed a complaint under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. The petitioner company floated a VRS on 17th June 2003, which the respondents accepted with a declaration waiving all claims. The petitioner applied to the Industrial Court for dismissal of the complaint. The Industrial Court dismissed the application on 12th July 2005. The petitioner challenged that order by filing the present writ petition.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU & PULP Act):
