1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5736 OF 2008 Voltas Limited ..Petitioner. Vs. Mahendra G. Salvi and another ..Respondents. .... Mr. K.M. Naik with Mr. Nitin Holkande i/b M/s. Haresh Mehta & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. R.D. Bhat for the Respondents. .... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 17th November, 2008. P.C. : At the hearing of the Petition, counsel appearing for the Petitioner has stated before the Court that purely as a matter of goodwill and without conceding to the correctness of the interpretation of Clauses 1.1 and 1.2 of the settlement as espoused by the Respondents, the Petitioner will allow to the First Respondent the benefit of the provision for special sick leave as contained in Clause 1.1. Learned Counsel for the Respondents does not dispute that in view of the statement which has been made on behalf of the Petitioner in the aforesaid terms, the grievance of the workman is 2 met. Hence, it has not become necessary for this Court to adjudicate upon the correctness of the order of the Industrial Court dated 17th April, 2008. It is clarified that should an issue relating to the interpretation of Clause 1.1 arise in the future, it shall be adjudicated upon independently by the appropriate forum on merits in accordance with law. Since the Petitioner has agreed to give the benefit of Clause 1.1 to the First Respondent, reserving its right to contest the correctness of the interpretation of Clause 1.1 in appropriate proceedings in future, the order which has been passed by the Industrial Court on 17th April, 2008 shall not survive. The complaint of unfair labour practices shall stand disposed of. The Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. *****