Dear seniors, Can the settlement before it’s agreed period be terminated? If yes under which circumstances it can be done? Regards, Prashant
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
470From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Settlement Duration Under ID Act
A settlement entered into under the ID Act must remain in force for the period prescribed under Section 19 of the Act. It cannot be curtailed but can be revoked as per Section 19(2) and (7) of the Act. The basic premise is that when a statute provides a thing to be done in a certain manner, no other manner can be adopted. For more details on the manner of operation of the settlement, one may refer to the Shukla Manseta Industries Ltd. case of 1977.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A settlement entered into under the ID Act must remain in force for the period prescribed under Section 19 of the Act. It cannot be curtailed but can be revoked as per Section 19(2) and (7) of the Act. The basic premise is that when a statute provides a thing to be done in a certain manner, no other manner can be adopted. For more details on the manner of operation of the settlement, one may refer to the Shukla Manseta Industries Ltd. case of 1977.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sushilkluthra, with due respect, I would like to correct you. Neither Section 19(2) nor Section 19(7) mentions revoking the settlement. In my view, a settlement cannot be terminated before the agreed period.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Thanks for apprising, but the statement of objects and reasons of the ID Bill of the Act uses the expression "revoke." I tried to look into a free legal dictionary for the meaning of revocation. In the East India Ceramics case in 1999, the learned counsel addressed the revocation or cancellation of the settlement. Anyways, thanks for concurring that the period cannot be curtailed.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Normally, it is not so, but if there is a genuine reason, either party can express their desire to terminate and state therein the reason for the same. It can be taken up as an ID, and a new settlement can be arrived at during the conciliation.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Termination of Settlement and Legal Implications
Termination of settlement is not provided under Section 19. Who is going to vouch for protection from penalty because of a breach of settlement under Section 29? Section 12 gives jurisdiction to the conciliation officer to perform his duties. Once the settlement is 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 the East India Ceramics case, the counsel emphasized that a settlement cannot be revoked or cancelled.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
0
0
Termination of settlement is not provided under Section 19. Who is going to vouch for protection from penalty because of a breach of settlement under Section 29? Section 12 gives jurisdiction to the conciliation officer to perform his duties. Once the settlement is 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 the East India Ceramics case, the counsel emphasized that a settlement cannot be revoked or cancelled.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user's reply contains accurate information regarding the termination of settlements and the jurisdiction of conciliation officers as per relevant sections. The mention of the East India Ceramics case emphasizing the irrevocability of settlements is correct. (1 Acknowledge point)
0
0
In ordinary circumstances, Sushil, it is okay, and there is no second opinion on that score. In extraordinary circumstances where it is not possible to honor the commitment, 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.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Brother, though many odd things are done, here we can focus on what is legally permissible. Let's consider a scenario with a minority union and a worker facing potential disciplinary action from the employer. The conciliation officer will send a notice to the worker for a new settlement, which the worker may or may not agree to. The worker, who aims to challenge the management, may bring forth various allegations under section 29. Additionally, it is important to note that a conciliation officer is a public servant whose duty is to ensure the implementation of an award without violating it.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Legal provision in ID Act 1947.doc
Illegal Termination Complaint under 2A of ID Act V3 - Updated.pdf
CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user's reply is accurate based on the Industrial Disputes Act, particularly Section 19(2) and (7), which govern the duration and revocation of settlements. Additionally, the reference to the Shukla Manseta Industries Ltd. case of 1977 is relevant for further insight. Thank you for sharing your knowledge! (1 Acknowledge point)