Delhi District Court
Sh. Deepak Kumar vs M/S J. M. D. Oil Mills Id No. 80/10 on 5 May, 2012
Sh. Deepak Kumar Vs M/s J. M. D. Oil Mills ID No. 80/10
IN THE COURT OF DR. P S MALIK THE PRESIDING OFFICER
IN
LABOUR COURT XI, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Computer ID No. 02402C0047842010
Type of the Case INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT
No. ID/ (555)/08/COI/WD/8477
Reference no. Copy to: (525) Dated: 04.11.2009
Date of Institution 10.02.2010
Date of Award 05.05.2012
WORKMAN MANAGEMENT
VS.
Sh. Deepak Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Dev M/s J. M. D. Oil Mills, Khasra No.
Singh C/o Rashtriya Mazdoor Sangh 86/11/20, Village Mundka, New Delhi
(Regd.), T-44-D, Karampura, New - 110041
Delhi - 110015
PRESENT:
None for the parties.
AWARD:
1.The Deputy Labour Commissioner, (West District), Labour Department, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, Delhi has referred this dispute arising between the parties named above for adjudication to this Labour Court Vide Notification No.ID/(555)/08/COI/WD/8477 Copy to: (525) Dated 04.11.2009 with the following terms of reference:-
"Whether the services of Sh. Deepak Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Dev Singh have been illegally and/or unjustifiably terminated by the management; and if yes, to what relief is he entitled?"
2. The claim of the workman was that he had been working with the management for last 6 years as "Helper" and his last drawn wages were Rs.3,683/- PM. It was further stated that he had been AWARD Page 1 of 3 Sh. Deepak Kumar Vs M/s J. M. D. Oil Mills ID No. 80/10 performing his duties sincerely, honestly, diligently and never gave any chance of complaint to the management. It was stated by the claimant that he was terminated from his services on 23.12.2008. The present claim has been filed by the claimant with the prayer that the management would be directed to reinstate the services of claimant with full back wages and all other consequential benefits.
3. Notice of the claim was issued to the management. On 17.11.2011, Sh. M R Malhotra, Counsel for the Management had appeared and copy of statement of claim was supplied to the management, thereafter, matter was adjourned for filing of written statement and proper authorization.
4. On 08.12.2011, ld. Counsel for the management moved an application under Rule 10 (b) and Rule 24 of the Industrial Dispute (Central) r/w Section 11 of the I D Act. Afterward, matter was adjourned for filing the reply to the aforementioned application of the management.
5. On 13.02.2012, AR for the workman moved an application for amendment in the statement of claim. Afterward, matter was adjourned for filing the reply to the aforementioned application of the workman. On the next date of hearing, ld. Counsel for the management stated that he does not oppose the aforementioned application of the workman on the ground that written statement is yet to be filed. Thereafter, application of the workman was allowed and amended statement of claim was taken on record and matter was adjourned for filing of written statement.
6. On 03.05.2012, both the parties stated that the workman had amicably settled all his disputes with the management for a full and final consideration of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only). Statements of the workman, Sh. Deepak Kumar as well as Sh. Manish Malhotra counsel for the management were recorded separately before the Court.
7. In the statement of workman, he stated that, he had settled all his AWARD Page 2 of 3 Sh. Deepak Kumar Vs M/s J. M. D. Oil Mills ID No. 80/10 disputes with the management for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only). He further stated that Management had made payment of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) in cash before the Court. He also stated that, he had received the total settlement amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) from the Management. The photocopy of receipt and settlement deed which were exhibited as Ex. C-1 and Ex.C-2 respectively filed on record duly signed by both the parties. Both the parties requested to pass an award in terms of the settlement between the parties.
8. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, this court hereby passes this award in terms of the settlement as aforesaid and holds that no other relief is required to be granted to the workman.
9. A copy of the award be sent to the concerned Office of the Labour Commissioner for necessary action.
10. The original documents be returned back against acknowledgement to the parties which have filed them and further subject to filing of certified copies of the same.
11. File be consigned to Record Room after completing due formalities. ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.05.2012 Dr. P S MALIK POLC XI, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi AWARD Page 3 of 3