Gujarat High Court Disposes of Petition Challenging Labour Court Award in Light of Settlement Between Employer and Workman. Parties Agree to Settle Industrial Dispute Under Section 2(p) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

High Court: Gujarat High Court
  • 97
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Jewel Consumer Pvt Ltd, filed a Special Civil Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, challenging an award dated 31.1.2025 passed by the Labour Court, Vadodara in Reference (LCV) No.110 of 2017. The Labour Court had partly allowed the reference and granted reinstatement with continuity of service and 25% backwages to the respondent workman, Firozbhai Akbarbhai Parmar. During the pendency of the petition, the parties entered into an amicable settlement and executed a Memorandum of Settlement under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on 13.2.2026. The settlement agreement was tendered by the petitioner's advocate and taken on record. The court noted that the parties had settled the dispute outside court and affixed their signatures to the agreement in the vernacular language. The terms and conditions of the settlement were reproduced in the judgment. The court disposed of the petition in terms of the settlement, setting aside the impugned award and directing the parties to comply with the terms of the settlement. The court also directed that the amount deposited by the petitioner before the Labour Court be disbursed to the respondent in accordance with the settlement terms. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2(p) - Settlement - Disposal of Petition - Parties arrived at an amicable settlement during pendency of petition challenging Labour Court award - Court disposed of petition in terms of settlement, setting aside the impugned award and directing compliance with settlement terms - Held that settlement under Section 2(p) is binding and petition can be disposed of accordingly (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petition challenging the Labour Court award should be disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement arrived at between the parties.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement dated 13.2.2026. The impugned award dated 31.1.2025 passed by Labour Court, Vadodara in Reference (LCV) No.110 of 2017 is set aside. The parties shall comply with the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement. The amount deposited by the petitioner before the Labour Court shall be disbursed to the respondent in accordance with the settlement terms.

Law Points

  • Settlement under Section 2(p) of Industrial Disputes Act
  • 1947
  • Disposal of petition in terms of settlement
  • Labour Court award modified by consent
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 1062

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15135 of 2025

2026-02-24

Hemant M. Prachchhak

2026:GUJHC:15676

Varun K. Patel for Petitioner, Darshit D. Thakkar for Respondent

Jewel Consumer Pvt Ltd

Firozbhai Akbarbhai Parmar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India challenging Labour Court award in an industrial dispute.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to quash and set aside the Labour Court award dated 31.1.2025 granting reinstatement with continuity of service and 25% backwages.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was aggrieved by the Labour Court award partly allowing the reference and granting reinstatement with backwages.

Previous Decisions

Labour Court, Vadodara passed award dated 31.1.2025 in Reference (LCV) No.110 of 2017 partly allowing the reference and granting reinstatement with continuity of service and 25% backwages.

Issues

Whether the petition should be disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement arrived at between the parties.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's advocate tendered copy of settlement agreement dated 13.2.2026. Parties agreed to settle the dispute outside court.

Ratio Decidendi

When parties to an industrial dispute arrive at a settlement under Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 during the pendency of a petition challenging a Labour Court award, the court may dispose of the petition in terms of the settlement, setting aside the award and directing compliance with the settlement terms.

Judgment Excerpts

Today, Mr. Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner tenders a copy of the settlement agreement dated_ 13.2.2026 arrived at between the parties, which is taken on record. It appears that during the pendency of the petition, an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties. The terms and conditions stipulated in the said settlement agreement shall form part and parcel of this order and are hereby reproduced as under:-

Procedural History

The Labour Court, Vadodara passed an award dated 31.1.2025 in Reference (LCV) No.110 of 2017 partly allowing the reference and granting reinstatement with continuity of service and 25% backwages. The petitioner challenged this award by filing Special Civil Application No.15135 of 2025 before the High Court of Gujarat. During the pendency of the petition, the parties entered into a settlement agreement dated 13.2.2026. The High Court disposed of the petition in terms of the settlement on 24.2.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 2(p)
  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Considers Whether Registrar NCLT Can Scrutinize Maintainability of Section 95 IBC Petition at Filing Stage. Appeal Challenges Single Judge's Order Holding E-Filing of Insolvency Petition Against Partnership Firm Void and Non-E...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Accused to Produce Documents in NI Act Case — Section 294 CrPC Does Not Bar Filing of Documents at Any Stage. The court held that the Magistrate erred in rejecting the application for production of documents as there is no ...