- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 12 October 2011
- Bench
- Sanjiv Khanna
- Case no.
- W.P.(C) 11390/2009
Judgment
KHANNA, J. _) OCTOBER VKR a SANJIV \'?6)Pfd 12,2011 - Pt& o{Yr Ae/"** a('awo"*
Case details
Parties and counsel
\ 14-20. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of order: 12 October,2011 + WRIT PETITION (ClVlL) NO. 11385/2009 AIR INDIA LIMITED ...... Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VETSUS UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ravinder Aganrual, CGSC for UOl. Mr. Atul Bandhu & Mr. Varun Baweja, Advocates for respondent workman. wRlT PETITION (ClVlL) NO. 11389/2009 AIR INDIA LIMITED ...... Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VETSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Aganrual, CGSC for UOl. Mr. Govind NaraYan, Advocate for respondent No.2. wRlT PETITION (ClVlL) NO. 11390/2009 AIR INDIA LIMITED ...... Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VETSUS w.p. (c) Nos. 1.138s/2009, 11389/2009, 11390/2009, 11391/2009, 1139712009,1140212009&1140412005 Page 1 of23 a I {) Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. \q,/ D UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Aganrual, CGSC for UOl. Mr. A.K. Trivedi, Advocate for respondent No.2. AIR INDIA LIMITED ...... Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VCTSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Aganrual, CGSC for UOl. Mr. Govind NaraYan, Advocate for resPondent No.2. wRlr PETITION (GlVlL) NO. 11397/2009 AIR INDIA LIMITED """ Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms. Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VETSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, CGSC for UOl. Mr. Atul Bandhu & Mr. Varun Baweja, Advocates for respondent workman. AIR INDIA LIMITED J ,1 I -rJ ctvl|-) No. 1140 W.p. (C) Nos.11385/2009, 11389/2009,.11390/zoo9, 11391/2009, 11397/2009, 114o2!2oo9&114o412oo9 Page2ot23 \) Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. Mr. A.K. Trivedi, Advocate for respondent No. 2. UNION OF INDIA VETSUS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ravinder Aganrual, CGSC for UOl. wRlT PETITION (ClVlL) NO. 11404/2009 AIR INDIA LIMITED ' -...'. Petitioner Through Ms. Ratna Dhingra, Ms.Shreya S. Dabas & Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. VETSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravinder Agaruual, CGSC for UOl. Mr. Atul Bandhu & Mr. Varun Baweja, Advocates for respondent workman. ) coRAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ,) , 3 il,i3i,l,Ji,[i1l?##:ffi$fi';J ["fu'*o in the Digest ? SANJIV KHANNA. J.: These seven writ petitions have been filed by National Aviation Company of India Limited, now known as Air lndia Limited, challenging different orders passed by the Presiding i i w.p. (c) Nos. 1 1 385/2009, 1 1 389/2009, ,t t Officer, Central Government, lndustrial Tribunal-cum-Labour \1 I Court under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act, for short). By the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has been directed to pay the respondent employees arrears towards wages as per the agreement dated sth May, 1996 entered into between the petitioner and the Air lndia Employees Guild. lt is accepted by the counsel for the parties that the reasoning given by the lndustrial Adjudicator in all orders is identical and, therefore, these writ petitions can be disposed by a common order. For the sake of convenience and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 11391 l2OOg titled National Aviation Company of lndia Limited, now known as Air lndia Limited, Versus Union of India and Raj Kumar is treated as the lead case. 2. The private respondents had filed applications under Section 33-C(2) of the Act before the Industrial Adjudicator stating, inter alia, that they had worked as drivers and were paid basic salary of Rs.1185t- per month and other allowances. They
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.