*Important Supreme Court Judgment on Settlement*
????A settlement arrived during conciliation proceedings would be binding upon two parties and also upon the workers joining thereafter.
*P. Virudhachalam and Ors. v. The Management of Lotus Mills and Ors., 1998 LLR 240*
????Pay roll check off facility given to the union by the management under a settlement, cannot be withdrawn by the management during the settlement.
*Management of K.S.R.T.C. v. K.S.R.T.C. Staff & workers’ Federation & Anr., 1999 LLR 390(SC): 1999(81) FLR 797*
????Adjudication and not writ petition will be proper to determine the validity and fairness of a settlement.
*Mayurakshi Cotton MIlls & Ors. v. Panchra Mayurakshi Cotton Mills Employees’ Union & Ors., 2000 LLR 455*
????A settlement with a recognised union during conciliation proceedings will be binding on all the workmen of the establishment.
*National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2000 LLR 228*
????A settlement can be arrived before the conciliation officer even on a holiday.
*National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2000 LLR 228*
????The object of a settlement is to ensure industrial peace.
*National Textile Corporation (APKKM) Limited v. Sree Yellamma Cotton, Woolen and Silk Mills Staff Association, 2001 LLR 195*
????During operation of a settlement, no demand can be made by the workers.
*National Textile Corporation (APKKM) Limited v. Sree Yellamma Cotton, Woolen and Silk Mills Staff Association, 2001 LLR 195*
????Workman receiving benefits under settlement can not challenge its validity.
*State of Uttaranchal vs. Jagpal Singh Tyagi. 2006 LLR 254.*
????Barring retired employees to get benefit arising out of settlement under Sec. 12(3) would not be illegal.
*Transmission Corpn., A.P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. P. Ramachandra Rao & Anr. 2006 LLR 576*
????Grievance about non-implementation of crystalised terms of settlement cannot be said to be ‘matter covered by the settlement’ for purpose of strike.
*Savita Chemicals (P) Ltd. v Dyes & Chemical Workers Union & Anr., 1999 LLR 188*
????Government employees can not go on strike since they have neither fundamental, statutory, moral or equitable justification to resort to strike.
*T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Others, 2003 LLR 863: 2003 (98) FLR 367*
????The High Court has incorrectly applied the provisions of section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in holding that no notice of strike was necessary on the part of the workmen/union whereas the legal consequences of not giving of such notice may be, it cannot be said in the circumstances, that the workers were admittedly on strike as a matter of fact.
*Uttar Pradesh State Bridge Corporation Ltd. & Ors. v. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Setu Nigam & Ors., 2004 LLR 289*
????When after strike, majority of workers reported for duty after settlement, punishment of increment stoppage to those who refused to join duty, was justified and legal.
*Mangement, Coimbatore District Central Co-operative Bank and Secretary, Coimbatore District Central Co-operative bank employees’ assocation and another. 2007 (114) FLR 236*
