Partly allowed

D.T.C. Thr. Its Chairman v. Vijay Kumar

Delhi HC11 Dec 2018W.P.(C)/3866/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

While dismissing a challenge to an industrial award directing reinstatement, the court distinguished earlier precedent based on the respondent's six years of service. Applying a newer Supreme Court decision, the court modified the award to grant 50% back wages instead of the full amount.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award was modified to grant 50% back wages to the respondent-workman instead of full back wages.

D.T.C. Thr. Its Chairman Vs Vijay Kumar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Decision: December 11, 2018

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3866/2008

¶4

D.T.C. THR. ITS CHAIRMAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Purvesh Butttan, Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

VIJAY KUMAR ..... Respondent

¶7

Through: Nemo.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶9

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶10

Impugned Award of 24^th October, 2007 directs reinstatement of respondent-workman with continuity of service and full back wages.

¶11

The challenge to impugned Award is on the legality of grant of full back wages. Petitioner’s counsel relies upon Supreme Court’s decision in General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudhan Singh (2005) 5 SCC 591 to submit that no back wages are to be paid to respondent-workman.

¶12

Respondent’s counsel submits that respondent had worked for about six years and was in regular employment and so, payment of back wages to respondent- workman is justified.

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

W.P.(C) 3866/2008

¶15

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned Award, record of this case and decision cited, I find that in Rudhan Singh (Supra), the workman had worked for less than one year and so, back wages were denied to him, whereas in the instant case, respondent-workman has worked for about six years. Although no evidence has been led by either side on the aspect of respondent-workman being gainfully employed elsewhere, but in view of Supreme Court’s decision in Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Phool Chand 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1583, 50% of back wages deserve to be granted.

¶16

Applying the ratio of Supreme Court’s decision in Phool Chand (Supra) to the facts of instant case, impugned Award is modified to the extent of granting 50% back wages, instead of full wages to respondent-workman.

¶17

This petition is accordingly disposed of, while modifying the impugned Award to the aforesaid extent.

¶18

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

¶19

DECEMBER 11, 2018 r

¶20

Page 2 of 2

¶21

W.P.(C) 3866/2008

D.T.C. Thr. Its Chairman v. Vijay Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.T.C. Thr. Its Chairman v. Vijay Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. K. Tripathi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kanijan & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Indian Wind Power Association Vs Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Power and Ors.

Mgmt. of Cantonment Board Merr Vs Preetam Singh

Jet Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Welfare Association Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Corruption Against Society (Regd) Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Ruchi Goyal & Anr. Vs Nbcc(India) Ltd.{Formerly National Building Construction Corporation Ltd.} & Ors.

P K Sharma Vs Orietntal Insurance Company Ltd.

Amita Gandoak Vs Raj Pal Meena Sub Registrar Iii, Asaf Ali Road and Anr.

Mgmt. of Cantonment Board Merr Vs Preetam Singh

D.T.C. Vs Yad Ram

Shashi Kandwal & Anr. Vs Dr Puneet Kumar Goel & Ors.

Chander Malik Vs Om Parkash Malik

Kamla Devi Sohanraj Singhvi Jain College of Education Vs Sanjay Awasthi & Anr.