Delhi District Court
Sheshmani vs Bobby Blowers on 25 November, 2023
IN THE COURT OF SHRI ARUN GOEL,
PRESIDING OFFICER : LABOUR COURT - X
ROUSE AVENUE COURTS : NEW DELHI
LIR No. 3973/2018
Sh. Sheshmani @ Rajesh,
S/o Sh. Amar Nath,
R/o VillRam Pur Kalan, P.O. Tilaura,
Distt. Jaunpur, U.P.
Through:
Sh. Umesh Kumar, Joint Secretary,
Bhartiya Engineering & General Mazdoor Union (Regd. No. 3606),
Bharat Mill Charkhi Gate, Plot No.1,
Near DBlock, Karampura,
New Delhi15.
... Workman
Versus
M/s Bobby Blowers,
through its Proprietor Sh. Dharmendra,
B25, Gali No.9, Industrial Area, Anand Parvat,
New Delhi110015.
... Management
Date of institution of the case : 23.10.2018
Date of passing the Award : 25.11.2023
A W A R D:
LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs.
M/s Bobby Blowers
Page 1/7
1.A reference No. F.3(380)/18/Ref./wd/Lab./1296 dated 15.10.2018 was received from appropriate government for adjudication and disposal of industrial dispute between the aforesaid workman and the management by formulating the following terms of reference :
"Whether the services of workman Sh. Sheshmani @ Rajesh S/o Sh. Amar Nath have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management; and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?"
2. A notice of the aforesaid reference was sent to the workman for filing of his statement of claim. On 03.01.2019 the workman appeared and filed his statement of claim along with documents. It is stated in the claim that he was working with the Management in the post of Turner since last 6 years and his last drawn wages were Rs.13,125/ and that he did not give any chance of complaint to the Management Department, hence, the service record of the deceased was neat and clean. The Management had assured him at the time of employment to provide appointment letter, attendance card, 15 days leave, 07 casual leaves, ESI, Bonus, Leave Book etc. He used to mark his attendance in the register kept at the entry gate while entering and exiting the management premises. Supervisor used to mark his presence inside the company premises. The owner of the management used to mark the attendance in the absence of supervisor. When he demanded the above said legal facilities from LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs. M/s Bobby Blowers Page 2/7 the management, the owner got angry and stopped the wages of January and February, 2018. when the worker demanded minimum wages as declared by the government and other statutory facilities, then without any prior notice, management terminated his services on 22.03.2018. Thereafter, on 23.03.2018 the workman sent a demand notice to management regarding payment of back wages along with reinstatement. But no reply was given by the management to the demand notice.
3. On 28.03.2018, he filed a complaint to Joint Labour Commissioner, Labour Department, Karampura, New Delhi through his union. Wherein Labour Commissioner issued a notice to the management to appear with all the relevant record. A representative of the management appeared but refused to take back the workman on duty. The conciliation was not successful and the conciliation officer referred the case to the court for adjudication. He prayed that the Management be directed to reinstate him to services with full back wages and consequential benefits.
4. A notice of the claim statement, filed on behalf of the workman, was issued to the management. On 03.10.2019 written statement was filed on behalf of the Management. It is stated that the workman joined the management in January, 2018 as helper and he was not LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs. M/s Bobby Blowers Page 3/7 sincere towards his work. It is further stated in the written statement that the services of the workman were never terminated by the Management as alleged rather he is guilty of gross unauthorised absenteeism without any intimation or prior approval of the management w.e.f. 22.03.2018 and all the efforts of Management to call him on duty proved infructuous due to the adamant attitude of the workman. Hence, the workman abandoned his job of his own by remaining absent from his duties. It is further stated in the written statement that the workman left the job of the Management due to the reason that he got better employment elsewhere. It is further stated that the workman had not worked with the management for more than 240 days continuously and had worked only for 02 months and 22 days in the year 2018. It is further stated in the written statement that the owner of the Management and the workman were neighbors from their native place and well known to each other and due to this very reason, workman used to visit the premises of the management frequently without any hesitation and the workman might have used the address of the Management for his correspondence because he does not have any permanent address in Delhi. It is prayed that the present claim of the claimant is liable to be dismissed as the workman has not come to the court with clean hands and is gainfully employed and is earning handsomely.
LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs. M/s Bobby Blowers Page 4/7
5. Rejoinder was filed on behalf of the claimant on 07.11.2019 wherein he has reiterated the facts as stated in his claim.
6. On completion of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 07.11.2019:
(i) Whether the workman had joined the services on 01.01.2018 and remained absent from duties w.e.f. 22.03.2018 and abandoned the job? OPM
(ii) Whether the services of the workman has been terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the management? OPW
(iii) Relief.
7. Thereafter, the matter was listed for claimant's evidence for 21.01.2020.
8. On 21.01.2020, the claimant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and the matter was adjourned for 19.02.2020 for evidence . On 19.02.2020 adjournment was sought on behalf of the Management subject to cost of Rs. 1000/- and the matter was adjourned to 21.04.2020. From 22.08.2020 to 30.08.2022, the workman failed to appear to tender his affidavit in evidence despite repeated opportunities. On 14.10.2022 further opportunity was given LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs. M/s Bobby Blowers Page 5/7 to the workman to tender his evidence subject to cost of Rs. 200/- to be deposited in DLSA and the matter was adjourned for workman evidence on 10.11.2022. Again from 10.11.2022 to 21.07.2023 none had appeared on behalf of the workman to tender his evidence. On 19.09.2023, AR for the workman has appeared in person and last and final opportunity is given to lead evidence and the matter was adjourned for 27.10.2023. Again on 27.10.2023, none has appeared on behalf of the workman to tender his evidence hence, the opportunity to lead workman evidence stood closed and the matter was adjourned for 20.11.2023.
9. On 20.11.2023, it is submitted by AR of the Management that he does not want to lead any evidence on behalf of the Management in the absence of workman evidence. His statement in this regard has been recorded separately.
10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case workman has not lead any evidence in support of averments made by him in the claim statement despite repeated opportunities. There is not admission on part of management regarding the averments made by the workman, Thus he has failed to prove his case. Accordingly, a No Relief Award is passed against the workman and reference stands answered.
LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs. M/s Bobby Blowers Page 6/7
11. A copy of the award be sent to the appropriate Government for its publications as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
ARUN Digitally signed
by ARUN GOEL
Announced in open court GOEL Date: 2023.11.27
15:59:51 +0530
on Dated: 25.11.2023 (Arun Goel)
Presiding Officer, Labour Court X
Rouse Avenue Courts
New Delhi: 25.11.2023
LIR No. 3973/18 : Sh. Sheshmani vs.
M/s Bobby Blowers
Page 7/7