IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36255 of 2009(B) -------------------------- ID.26/2004 of LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.R. SASIDHARAN NAIR, NANDANAM, TRRA - 141A, THAMARASSERY ROAD, POONITHURA.P.O, KOCHI - 682 038. BY ADV. SMT.K.NANDINI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. FACT LIMITED, CORPORATE OFFICE, ELOOR, UDYOGAMANDAL. BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND, SC (A.201) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.36255 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, a retired employee of the first respondent Company, has filed this writ petition claiming that certain amounts due to him have not been paid to him, till date. The petitioner was dismissed from service. However, his dismissal was the subject matter of adjudication of the Labour Court, Ernakulam in I.D.No.26 of 2004. As per Ext.P1 award, he was directed to be reinstated. He had approached this court for the implementation of the award in his favour. During the pendency of the said case, he entered into a settlement with the respondent and he was reinstated. He complains that the whole amount that was due to him as per the settlement has not been paid, till date. The respondent is not willing to pay the amount. 2. Adv.K.Anand appears for the respondent. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent submitting that as per the terms of settlement, the entire amount has already been paid. Subsequently, the petitioner continued in service and has also retired. It Wpc 36255/2009 2 is submitted that this writ petition has been filed as an after thought. 3. It is not possible for this court to adjudicate the disputed questions of fact that arise for determination in this writ petition, as evident from the nature of the dispute. The petitioner will have to pursue other legal remedies, if he has any subsisting grievance against the respondent. 4. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to pursue other legal remedies, if he has any subsisting grievance in the matter. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk