Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sohanlal vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi Through ... on 4 September, 2009
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench TA No.1391/2009 New Delhi this the 4th day of September, 2009. Hon'ble Mr. Shanker Raju, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) Sohanlal, S/o Shri Gig Raj, R/o H. No. E-138, Tagore Garden, Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi. -Applicant (By Advocate Shri Anil Singhal) -Versus- 1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through its Commissioner, Town Hall, Delhi. 2. Delhi Jal Board through Chief Executive Officer, Varunalaya Bhawan, Jhandewalan, New Delhi. -Respondents (By Advocate Shri Nishakant Pandey) O R D E R Hon'ble Mr. Shanker Raju, Member (J):
Through this TA applicant who has since been transferred to Delhi Jal Board by an order dated 10.11.2004 seeks quashing of the same and his posting with M.C.D.
2. Applicant, who was appointed as a Sewar Gang Beldar on 9.8.1990 in Delhi Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Undertaking (DWS & SDU), a part of MCD. Another department, namely Conservancy and Sanitation Engineering (CSE) was also functioning and looking after and managing the work of municipal waste relating to its collection. The employees who are appointed in MCD and DWS & SDU were directed to work in CSE. Accordingly, the applicant was also directed to work in CSE in a diverted capacity. However, on 4.12.1996 CSE was bifurcated into two wings but this was reverted back in 1997. However, in 1998 Delhi Jal Board was established under the Delhi Water Act, 1988 and the erstwhile DWS and SDU, an undertaking of the MCD was dissolved and all employees of DWS and SDU were treated as employees of Delhi Jal Board vide letter dated 15.3.2000. Accordingly, applicant was relieved from MCD on 10.11.2004.
3. An order passed on 18.2.2005 subjected the order passed by the respondents to the contention raised by the applicant. Later on applicant resumed his duties in Delhi Jal Board.
4. Learned counsel of applicant Shri Anil Singhal relying upon a decision of the Apex Court in Jawhar Lal Nehru University v. Dr. K.S. Jawalakar, 1989 (3) SLR SC 730 ruled that without the consent one cannot be transferred unilaterally from one employer to another.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel of respondents vehemently opposed the contentions and stated that as DWS and SDU have become part of Delhi Jal Board, applicant was rightly treated, as per the agreement, as an employee of the Delhi Jal Board.
6. We have carefully considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material on record. Apart from the decision of the Apex Court in Jawahar Lal Nehru University (supra) the Apex Court in B.C.P.P. Mazdoor Sangh v. N.T.P.C., (2007) 14 SCC 234 on the issue of transfer from one employer to another ruled that this can be done by a tripartite agreement to which the employee should also be a party and his consent is mandatory.
7. Applicant, who was admittedly employed with MCD, without taking his consent, he cannot be transferred unilaterally to Delhi Jal Board, which is a different employer. As such, the order passed by the respondents cannot be countenanced in law. Accordingly, the T.A. is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. Respondents are directed to transfer back applicant to MCD with all consequences in law. No costs.
(Dr. Veena Chhotray) (Shanker Raju) Member (A) Member (J) San.