2p Settlement - 18 (1) -Ida

Dear seniors,
Can the settlement before it's agreed period be terminated?
If yes under which circumstances it can be done?
Regards,
Prashant

Settlement entered into under ID Act has to remain in force as per period prescribed under section 19 of the Act. It cannot be curtailed but revoked as per section 19(2) and (7) of the Act. The basic premise is when a statute provides a thing to be done in a manner then no other manner can be adopted. Regarding manner of operation of settlement one may refer to Shukla Manseta industries ltd case of 1977.

Dear Sushilkluthra,
With due respect to you, I would like to correct you.
Neither the Section 19(2) nor the Section 19(7) states about revoking the settlement. According to me 2p settlement can not be terminated before agreed period.

Thanks for apprising but statement of objects and reasons of the ID Bill of the Act uses the expression "revoke". I tried to look into free legal dictionary the meaning of revocation. In East India Ceramics case in 1999, the LD. Counsel addressed for revocation or cancellation of settlement. But any way thanks for concurring that period cannot be curtailed.

Normally it is not so but if there is genuine reason either party can express their desire to Terminate and stating therein the reason for the same. It can be taken up as an ID and a settlement new can be arrived during the conciliation

Termination of settlement is not provided under section 19. Further who is going to vouch for protection from penalty because of breach of settlement under section 29. Section 12 gives jurisdiction to conciliation officer to perform his duties. Once the settlement was arrived at, there is no industrial dispute left for settlement/ adjudication. Thus the conciliation officer will not be able to assume jurisdiction in the matter. In east India ceramics case, the counsel emphasized that settlement cannot be revoked or cancelled.

Sushil in ordinary state it is ok and there is no second opinion on that score. In extraordinary circumstances where it is not possible to honour the committment the parties can either amend or alter. When it is together there is no apprehension. For some obvious reasons parties may choose to have the New Settlement under 12(3). It is a very very rare situation

Brother, though practically many odd things are done but we here can project what is legally permissible. Let us think of a minority union and a worker against whom disciplinary action is contemplated by employer who will also be sent notice by conciliation officer for new settlement who may or may not agree to the new settlement. The sole workman who wants to take to task the management will make all and sundary allegations under section 29. Besides a conciliation officer is a public servant. His duty is to ensure implementation of award and not flout it.