D.T.C v. Birbal Singh & Anr

ORDER %

11.09.2015

¶1The appealshave been listedby the Registryon beingnotedthatthey were adjournedsine die to await the decisionofthe SupremeCourtin SLP

(C) No.1506/2007and connectedPetitionsseekingSpecialLeaveto Appeal.

¶2Issue concernsa batch of employeeswho had gone on a strike and services were terminated without holding an inquiry. The individual LPA 325/2006&LPA 307/2007 p^ge]of3 employeesucceededbeforethe LabourCourt. Awardsin theirfavourwere upheldby learnedSingleJudgesofthis Court. In some casesLettersPatent Appeals filed were dismissedand this explainsthe DTC proceedingto the Supreme Court.

¶3Instant two appeals were filed at a stage when Petitions seeking SpecialLeave to Appeal againstlarge numberof decisionsin appealswere pendingbefore the SupremeCourt.

¶4On February 11, 2010, grantingleave to appeal, the Supreme Court directed that such workmen who had not crossed the age of superannuation would be reinstated forthwith and would be paid 50% back wages. Payment of balance amount in terms of the award impugned was stayed.

¶5Similarordershavebeenpassedin the instantappeals.

¶6In our opinion it would be useless for us to keep these appeals pending for the reason as regards this Court is concerned, the law has attainedfinalityin favour of the workmen. Dependingupon what decision the Supreme Court finally takes would depend the ultimate fate of the workmen concerned.

¶7We note that the two respondents in the captioned appeals have been reinstated in service and statement has been made on an earlier occasion by learned counsel for DTC that 50% back wages have been paid to the said two workmen, in harmony with the order passed by the Supreme Court on February 11, 2010.

¶8We dispose of both appeals issuing a declaratory order. The declaratoryorderwouldbe that if the SupremeCourtupholdsthe earlier LFA 325/2006c£ LPA 307/2007 page 2 of3 decisions passed by this Court in favour of the workmen, the respondent No.1 in both the appeals would be entitled to full benefit of the award. If the earlier decisions passed by this Court are modified, full or in part, by the Supreme Court the said decision would bind the appellant as well as the workmen in the two appeals.

¶9So observing and declaring the two appeals are disposed of.

¶10No costs. PRADEEP NANDI^JOG, J.

MUKTA GUPTA, J. SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 mamta LPA 325/2006&LPA 307/2007 3of3

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 325/2006 D.T.C. Appellant Represented by: Mr.D.S.Mishra, Advocate for Mr.Anand Nandan, Advocate versus BIRBAL SINGH & ANR. Respondents Represented by: None LPA 307/2007 D.T.C. Appellant Represented by: Mr.Manoj Kumar, Advocate with Ms.Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate versus MAHABIR SINGH EX DRIVER & ANR Respondents Represented by: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA