Dismissed

Chhttar Singh v. Dtc

Delhi HC13 Aug 2019W.P.(C)/5070/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a belated claim for regularization raised after retirement was not maintainable, but allowed the workman to receive the financial benefits awarded by the Industrial Tribunal for treating him as a regular employee. The court directed the DTC to pay the amount within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

DTC directed to pay the financial benefits awarded by the Labor Court to the workman within four weeks.

Chhttar Singh Vs Dtc — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~8 & 9

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 13^th August, 2019

¶4

- W.P.(C) 5070/2013

¶5

CHHTTAR SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Raj Kumar Mann, Advocate versus DTC ..... Respondent Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel for DTC along with Mr.Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms.Laveena Arora, Advocates.

¶6

- W.P.(C) 2059/2014 & CM APPL.4311/2014

¶7

DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel for DTC along with Mr.Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms.Laveena Arora, Advocates versus CHATTAR SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Raj Kumar Mann, Advocate.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

¶9

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶10

Both the parties have challenged the award dated 13^th March, 2013 whereby the Industrial Tribunal awarded the financial benefits of difference in the regular pay scale and the wages paid to the workman as a daily wager for a period of three years prior to the date of reference i.e. 22^nd March, 2010.

¶11

Learned counsel for the DTC submitted that the workman joined the

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

W.P.(C)5070/2013, 2059/2014

¶14

DTC as a daily wages driver in 1974; the workman remained absent for more than three months in 1982 whereupon the DTC declared him deemed to have resigned w.e.f. 30^th April, 1982; the workman made a representation whereupon he was taken back in service w.e.f. 12^th October, 1983; the workman again absented himself from duty whereupon his services were dispensed with on 09^th May, 1984; the workman raised an industrial dispute which resulted in an award dated 15^th December, 1999 whereby he was awarded reinstatement with 25% back wages and continuity in service; DTC challenged the award of the Labour Court before this Court which was dismissed; DTC filed LPA which was also dismissed on 10^th May, 2002 whereupon the workman joined the duty on 01^st January, 2003. On 07^th April, 2010, the workman raised another industrial dispute claiming full wages of a regular pay scale of the post of driver.

¶15

The Labour Court partly allowed the claim by directing DTC to pay the difference of wages of regular pay scale and wages paid to him treating him as a daily wager with effect from three years prior to the date of reference dated 22^nd March, 2010. 4. Learned counsel for the DTC urged at the time of the hearing that the workman was not a regular employee and therefore, the direction of the Industrial Tribunal is not justified. It is further submitted that the workman retired in 2009 and he raised an industrial dispute after his retirement. It is further submitted that the workman did not raise the issue of regularization in the earlier industrial dispute and therefore, the workman’s claim is barred by the principle of constructive res judicata.

¶16

Learned counsel for the workman urged at the time of the hearing that the workman was a regular employee and not a daily wager driver as alleged

¶17

Page 2 of 3

¶18

W.P.(C)5070/2013, 2059/2014

¶19

by the DTC. The workman filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act which was withdrawn on the objection that an industrial dispute should be raised whereupon the workman raised an industrial dispute.

¶20

According to DTC, the workman was awarded reinstatement with 25% back wages as a daily wager by the award dated 15^th December, 1999 whereas according to the workman, he was awarded reinstatement as a regular employee with 25% back wages by the award dated 15^th December, 1999.

¶21

The award dated 15^th December, 1999 of the Labour Court has been examined. In that award, no issue was raised as to the status of the workman i.e. whether he was a daily wager or a regular employee and consequently there is no finding of the Labour Court that he was a regular employee. The workman joined the duty in terms of the above award on 01^st January, 2003 and he retired on 30^th April, 2009. The belated claim for regularization raised by the employee after the retirement is not maintainable. However, no interference is warranted in the financial benefits granted to the workman. DTC is directed to pay the amount in terms of the award of the Labour Court to the workman within four weeks.

¶22

Both the writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms. The pending application is disposed of.

¶23

Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsel for the parties under signatures of the Court Master.

¶24

J.R. MIDHA, J.

¶25

AUGUST 13, 2019/ dk

¶26

Page 3 of 3

¶27

W.P.(C)5070/2013, 2059/2014

Chhttar Singh v. Dtc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhttar Singh v. Dtc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Chogori India Retail Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Airads Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Abhijit Mishra Vs National Housing Bank & Anr.

Neeraj Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sita Devi and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

National Pharmaceutical Pric.a Vs Garima Seth & Ors.

Varaha Infra - Jceg (Jv) Vs National Highway Authority of India and Anr.

Id Mohammad Vs Sunil Kumar & Ors.

Ms. S Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Ajendra Kumar Mishra @ Ajendra Mishra Vs State

Purnima Uppal & Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Bhupender Kr. Sahni Vs State & Anr.

Deepa Arya Vs the State & Anr.