IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 WA.No. 2092 of 2009 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.28686/1999 Dated 09/06/2009 .................... APPELLANT/3rd RESPONDENT: -------------------------------- M/S.KANCOR INGREDIENTS LTD., (FORMERLY KANCOR FLAVOURS & EXTRACTS LTD) ANGAMALLY SOUTH PO, 683 573 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.MR.MATHEW VARGHESE. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA SRI.TERRY V.JAMES RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. KANCOR GENERAL WORKERS UNION (CITU) ANGAMALY, REPRESENTED BY K.K.PONNAPPAN, JOINT SECRETARY. 2. KANCOR CASUAL WORKERS UNION (INTUC) ANGAMALY, REPRESENTED BY P.J.BENNY UNION LEADER. 3. KANCOR HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION (INTUC) ANGAMALY,REPRESENTED BY K.T.RAJAPPA UNION LEADER. 4. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 5. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI. P. RAMAKRISHNAN R4 & R5 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.K. MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA.No. 2092 of 2009 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A : TRUE COPY OF LONG TERM SETTLEMENT DATED 04.02.2002 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE APPELLANT AND 1ST TO 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE J.Chelameswar, C.J. & Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 2092 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. Respondents 1 to 3 filed O.P. No.28686 of 1999, challenging Exts.P2 and P5 orders passed by respondents 5 and 4 respectively. The 5th respondent passed Ext.P2 order exercising his powers under the provisions of the Kerala Head Load Workers Act and Ext.P5 order was passed by the 4th respondent exercising his appellate powers. As a result of Ext.P5, the dispute now stands remanded to the 5th respondent for fresh adjudication. It was aggrieved by the said judgment, the appeal has been filed. 2. During the pendency of the appeal, by Annexure A settlement entered into between the parties, the dispute which is the subject matter of Exts.P2 and P5 has been settled and on that basis, parties have agreed to withdraw this appeal also. In the light of the above, counsel for the appellant seeks disposal of the appeal. WA No. 2092 of 2009 -:2:- 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for respondent 1 to 3 also and taking note of the aforesaid facts, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. It is made clear that having regard to the terms of Annexure A settlement, the fresh adjudication of the matter pursuant to Ext.P5 is unnecessary. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. Antony Dominic, Judge. ttb