Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 24-09-2018 in case of petitioner name Rajeshwar Mahto vs Alok Kumar Gupta, G.M., M/s Bi
| |

Supreme Court Denies Additional Compensation Claim in Birla Corporation Employment Dispute

The case of Rajeshwar Mahto v. Alok Kumar Gupta, G.M., M/s Birla Corporation Ltd. is a significant ruling in employment disputes concerning final compensation settlements. The Supreme Court had to decide whether the appellant was entitled to additional monetary benefits beyond the Rs. 7,50,000/- already granted in a previous ruling. The appellant, unsatisfied with the awarded sum, filed fresh applications demanding further compensation.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Rajeshwar Mahto, was previously an employee of M/s Birla Corporation Ltd. His employment dispute was addressed in Civil Appeal No. 4482 of 1998, wherein the Supreme Court passed an order on 23.02.2018 awarding him Rs. 7,50,000/- as full and final settlement.

As per the Court’s earlier ruling:

  • Rajeshwar Mahto was directed to vacate the company-allocated quarter.
  • The company was instructed to pay him Rs. 7,50,000/- within a week of vacating the premises.

Despite this ruling, Mahto was dissatisfied and filed new applications seeking additional compensation, citing financial needs, including expenses for his daughter’s marriage.

Legal Issues Considered

  • Was the appellant entitled to additional compensation beyond the settled Rs. 7,50,000/-?
  • Did the Supreme Court’s previous judgment require modification?
  • Was there any legal or factual basis for increasing the awarded amount?

Arguments by the Appellant

Rajeshwar Mahto, appearing in person, argued that:

  • The compensation amount was insufficient to meet his needs, including his daughter’s marriage expenses.
  • He was entitled to a higher settlement considering his years of service and unpaid dues.
  • The company’s financial position allowed it to pay him more.

Arguments by the Respondents

The legal representative for Birla Corporation Ltd. countered with the following points:

  • The Supreme Court had already issued a reasoned judgment settling all claims.
  • The appellant had accepted the Rs. 7,50,000/- as full and final settlement.
  • There was no factual or legal basis for reopening the case.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court carefully examined the applications and ruled against any further modification of the previous judgment. The Court stated:

“The order dated 23.02.2018 is quite a reasoned order wherein this Court has taken into consideration the entire factual and legal aspects of the case, all previous orders passed in the main case out of which the contempt petition arose, the effect and consequences of the orders passed in the matters, applicant’s monthly emoluments, his length of service period, and all his other legal entitlements payable under various heads and then worked out the final figure of Rs.7,50,000/- for being paid to him by his employer.”

The Court found that the appellant’s new request had no legal merit and observed:

“There is no error much less apparent error in the order dated 23.02.2018 which may persuade us to further modify and award more money than what was awarded to the applicant. The applicant has to be now satisfied with the order dated 23.02.2018.”

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court ruled:

  • The appellant’s request for additional compensation was dismissed.
  • The appellant must vacate the company quarter within three months.
  • He would receive Rs. 7,50,000/- as already determined in the previous order.
  • The Court’s decision was final and could not be modified further.

The judgment concluded with a practical note:

“The applicant, in his submission, mainly urged one issue that he needs money for the marriage of his daughter. If that be the position, then the amount of Rs.7,50,000/- can be used by him for performing the marriage of his daughter.”

Conclusion

This ruling reinforces the finality of Supreme Court judgments in employment disputes. The Court made it clear that once a fair and reasoned settlement is reached, subsequent applications seeking additional amounts without legal justification will not be entertained. The case serves as a precedent for similar disputes, ensuring that once compensation is settled, claimants cannot repeatedly seek further amounts.


Petitioner Name: Rajeshwar Mahto.
Respondent Name: Alok Kumar Gupta, G.M., M/s Birla Corporation Ltd..
Judgment By: Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar.
Place Of Incident: Jharkhand.
Judgment Date: 24-09-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Rajeshwar Mahto vs Alok Kumar Gupta, G. Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 24-09-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Termination Cases
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Judgment by Abhay Manohar Sapre
See all petitions in Judgment by Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in Declared Infructuous
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category

Similar Posts