Delhi District Court
Sh.Munna Khan vs M/S Sewa International Fashion Ltd on 29 September, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. CHANDRA GUPTA
PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURTX
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
D.I.D. No. :469/06
Date of Institution of the case :07.12.2006
Date on which reserved for Award :10.09.2012
Date on which Award is passed :29.09.2012
Unique ID no. 02402C0688302006
Sh.Munna Khan
R/o H. No. 156, Prayog Vihar, Hari Nagar,
New Delhi ...............Workman
Versus
M/s Sewa International Fashion Ltd.,
12/1, Mathura, Road, Faridabad,
Haryana
Also as
M/s Stylish Fabricators,
No. 51, Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar,
Delhi15
&
5, Furniture Block,Kirti Nagar,
Delhi15 ................Management
A W A R D
The workman Sh. Munna Khan, raised an industrial dispute
regarding the termination of his services by the management of M/s
Sewa International Fashion Ltd./ M/s Stylish Fabricators. Direct
statement of claim was filed by the workman in the court. In the
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 1 out of 12
statement of claim, it is stated by the workman that he was appointed
as Tailor in the year 1987 with the management at Mayapuri, New
Delhi; that thereafter, it shifted to Kirti Nagar; that the workman had
been working with the management, its sister concern M/s Stylish
Fabricators, No. 5 Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi15, M/s
Image Fashion, 12/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana, M/s
Hindustan Garments, B82, Mayapuri, Phase I, New Delhi64 in
different capacities such as Tailor, Pattern Maker in sampling
department and also cutting master from time to time as per direction
of the management; that he was not given proper appointment letter
and other documents; that the workman was having gate pass, pay
slips, ESI card etc. since the year 1995; that the work of the workman
throughout had been very satisfactory, rather to the entire satisfaction
of the management and its supervisors etc.; that he had been
discharging his duties faithfully, honestly and efficiently; that he in
fact rendered meritorious services to the management and his services
all along had been appreciated by the management; that there had
been not even a single instance when even the slightest improvement
in his work or conduct might have been needed by the management;
that there had been no complaint of whatsoever nature against him;
that the management quite for some time past had been violating the
labour laws and had been indulging in unfair labour practices to
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 2 out of 12
which the workman resented as a result the management had not been
listening to the just, fair and reasonable demands of the workman;
that in order to get rid of the workman, the management had been
behaving with the workman in an unbecoming manner and was even
delaying the wages legally and legitimately earned by the workman so
as to control the workman to leave the services of the management;
that somehow or the other workmen went through the tricks of the
management as a result the management could not succeed in their
mission; that the management had given the job of tailoring, cutting
master and pattern maker from time to time to the workman; that
ultimately the management succeeded in its nefarious designs on
28.09.06 and asked the workman to go to Kirti Nagar and after going
there the workman was told that his services have been terminated;
that he was extended threats; that neither he was given payment for
notice period or any notice; that even salary of Rs. 8,000/ per month
for the month of September, 2006 was not paid to the workman; that
he went to report the matter to the SHO, PS Kirti Nagar on 28.09.06
but he was not heard and was turned away; that subsequently he
reported the matter to the Commissioner of Police but so far no action
has been taken; that the management has not paid even fund, gratuity,
terminal benefits to the workman; that the management has not paid
anything and he is out of employment since 28.09.06; that he had
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 3 out of 12
been going to the office of the management but was not allowed to
serve; that the workman sent legal notice through his counsel on
17.10.06 by registered A.D. thereby requesting the management to
reinstate the workman into service with all usual benefits and back
wages; that no positive response was received from the management;
that on the contrary the registered envelope containing notice was
returned back by the postal authorities with the remarks " Lene Se
Inkar"; that the workman again sent reminder notice to the
management vide notice dated 31.10.06; that the legal notice
reminder sent by registered post was returned by the postal authorities
with the remarks "Lene Se Inkar". Hence, the workman has claimed
for reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of service and all
his dues.
Notice of filing of the statement of claim was sent to
the management. The management was served by way of affixation
for 12.07.2007 at the Delhi address as given in its respect by the
workman, on record, but neither appeared nor filed its written
statement on its behalf and the management was proceeded exparte
in the instant proceeding vide the relevant order passed in this regard,
on record and the case fixed for exparte workman evidence.
In support of his case, the workman himself has
appeared as WW1 in exparte workman evidence, tendered his
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 4 out of 12
affidavit by way of evidence Ex. WW1/A as also relied upon the
documents Exts.WW1/1 to WW1/7, Exts. WW1/7A to WW1/7K, and
Exts. WW1/8 to WW1/21, on record.
The workman has also examined Sh. Abid Hussain
as WW2 in exparte workman evidence, who has tendered his affidavit
by way of evidence Ex. WW2/A.
After examining WW2, exparte evidence on behalf
of the workman was closed.
It is seen from the record that the workman has appeared in
exparte workman evidence as WW1, tendered his affidavit by way of
evidence Ex. WW1/A as also relied upon documents Exts. WW1/1 to
WW1/7, Exts. WW1/7A to WW1/7K, Exts. WW1/8 to WW1/21, on
record. In his affidavit by way of evidence Ex. WW1/A, the
workman has reiterated the contents of his statement of claim and has
deposed interalia that he was appointed as Tailor in the year 1987
with the management at Mayapuri, New Delhi; that thereafter, it
shifted to Kirti Nagar; that the workman had been working with the
management, its sister concern M/s Stylish Fabricators, No. 5
Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi15, M/s Image Fashion 12/1,
Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana, M/s Hindustan Garments, B82,
Mayapuri, Phase I, New Delhi64 in different capacities such as
Tailor, Pattern Maker in sampling department and also cutting master
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 5 out of 12
from time to time as per direction of the management; that he was not
given proper appointment letter and other documents; that the
workman was having gate pass, pay slips, ESI card etc. since the year
1995; that his work throughout had been very satisfactory and rather
to the entire satisfaction of the management and its supervisors etc.;
that he has discharging his duties faithfully, honestly and efficiently;
that there had been not a single instance when even the slightest
improvement in his work or conduct might have been needed by the
management; that there had been no complaint of whatsoever nature
against him; that the management had been for some time past had
been violating the labour laws and had been indulging in unfair
labour practices; that he had resented to the management, which had
not been heard by the management; that in order to get rid of him, the
management had been behaving with him in an unbecoming manner
and was even delaying the wages legally and legitimately earned by
him so as to compel him to leave the services of the management; that
ultimately the management had terminated his services on 28.09.06;
that he had been extended threats; that neither he was given payment
for notice period or any notice; that his salary of Rs. 8,000/ for
September, 2006 was not paid to him; that he had reported the matter
to the SHO, PS Kirti Nagar, on 28.09.06 but he was not heard; that
subsequently, he reported the matter to the Commissioner of Police
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 6 out of 12
but no action had been taken; that the management had not paid even
Provident Fund, Gratuity, terminal benefits etc. to him; that he had
gone to the office of the management but was not allowed to enter the
premises and to work; that he is out of employment since 28.09.06 ;
that he had got sent a legal notice on 17.10.06 through his counsel
thereby requesting the management to reinstate with all usual benefits
and back wages through Registered AD Post; that no positive
response was received by him from the management; that on the
contrary the registered envelope was returned back by the Postal
Authorities with the remarks " LENE SE INKAR"; that he again sent
a reminder notice to the management vide notice dated 31.10.06
through registered AD Post and courier which had also been returned
back by the postal authorities with the remarks " LENE SE INKAR";
that he had not received any reply from the management so far; that
the management had not followed the principles of natural justice;
that the retrenchment of his services by the management is illegal,
invalid and against the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act; that he
was still ready and willing to work with the management.
Ex. WW1/1 is the ESI identity card in respect of the
workman; Ex. WW1/2 is a temporary identification certificate of the
ESIC in respect of the workman; Ex. WW1/3 being NSSN form
acknowledgment Slip in respect of workman; Ex. WW1/4 being pay
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 7 out of 12
slip of the management M/s Sewa International Fashion Ltd., at 12/1
Mathura Road, Faridabad in respect of the workman for the month of
June (year not given); Ex. WW1/5 being the ESICT.I.C. valid for 13
weeks from the date of appointment in respect of the workman
showing his date of appointment as 21.06.1999 in respect of M/s
Hindustan Garments at B82, Mayapuri, Phase I, New Delhi64; Exts.
WW1/6, WW1/7, WW1/7A to WW1/7K being alleged gate passes
dated 12.06.1997, 29.08.1997, 27.08.1995, 17.08.1997, 31.08.1997,
13.09.1997, 10.09.1997, 12.09.1997, 15.08 (year not given),
21.08.1997, 11.09.1997, 02.09.1997 and 24.08.1997 respectively in
the name of M/s Stylish Fabricators No. 5, Furniture Block, Kirti
Nagar, New Delhi15; Exts. WW1/8 to WW1/12 being the pay slips
in respect of the workman of one M/s Hindustan Garments for the
months of July 1999, August 1999, December 1999, November 1999,
September 1999 respectively and Exts. WW1/13 to WW1/21 being
the pay slips in respect of the workman of one M/s Image Fashions at
12/1, M. Road, Faridabad for the months of March 2004, January
2004, October 2004, July 2004, November 2004, December 2004,
May 2004, September 2004, August 2004 respectively.
The workman has also led the evidence of WW2 one Sh.
Abid Hussain in his exparte workman evidence, who has filed his
affidavit by way of evidence Ex. WW2/A to the effect that he was the
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 8 out of 12
colleague of the workman; that he had worked with the management
as Embroidery Tailor w.e.f. 1987 to the year 2002; that the workman
had worked with dedication and devotion and there had been no
complaint against him; that the management was in the habit of
throwing the workmen out of employment on one pretext or the other,
not paying the legal dues to the workmen; that the management
prepared fabricated documents/records in order to avoid its legal
liabilities and indulges in unfair labour practices.
Thereafter, exparte workman evidence has been closed, on
record.
It is seen from the record that though it has been alleged by
the workman in his statement of claim as also in his affidavit by way
of evidence Ex. WW1/A that he had been employed by the
management namely M/s Sewa International Fashions Limited which
is the only management mentioned as a party in his statement of claim
as also in his affidavit by way of evidence Ex. WW1/A though with
its address at 12/1 Mathura Road, Faridabad as given in the same as
also allegedly at No.51, Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar, Delhi110015
and No. 5, Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar, Delhi110015, on the
allegations that he had been working with the management, its sister
concerns M/s Stylish Fabricators, No. 5 Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar,
New Delhi15, M/s Image Fashion, 12/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad,
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 9 out of 12
Haryana, M/s Hindustan Garments, B82, Mayapuri, Phase I, New
Delhi64 in different capacities such as Tailor, Pattern Maker in
sampling department and also cutting master from time to time as per
direction of the management, however, the workman has not filed any
document or led any evidence in his exparte workman evidence, on
record, to the effect that the said concerns, as above said, were, in
fact, the sister concerns of the management against whom he has filed
the instant statement of claim in respect of his allegations, as above
said, and thus it has not been proved, on record that the said
managements are in fact one management in order for the alleged
employment of the workman in the same for the periods alleged to be
counted as a single employment qua the respondent/management
arrayed in the statement of claim. It is further seen from the record that the documents Exts. WW1/1 to WW1/7, WW1/7A to WW1/7K, WW1/8 to WW1/12, WW1/13 to WW1/21 which are alleged ESIC Identity Card in respect of the workman dated 07.12.1999 (Ex. WW1/1); ESIC Temporary Identification Certificate in respect of the workman of one M/s Indus Fashions, 13/5 Mathura Road, Faridabad (Ex.WW1/2); NSSN form acknowledgment Slip dated 16.06.04 in respect of workman(Ex. WW1/3); pay slip for the month of June (year not given) of the management (Ex. WW1/4); ESICT.I.C. in respect of the workman dated 30.10.1999 of one M/s Hindustan D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 10 out of 12 Garments at B82, Mayapuri, Phase I, New Delhi64; gate passes dated 12.06.1997, 29.08.1997, 27.08.1995, 17.08.1997, 31.08.1997, 13.09.1997, 10.09.1997, 12.09.1997, 15.08 (year not given), 21.08.1997, 11.09.1997, 02.09.1997 and 24.08.1997 of M/s Stylish Fabricators, No. 5, Furniture Block, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi110015 allegedly bearing the stamp of the management (Exts. WW1/6, WW1/7, WW1/7A to WW1/7K); pay slips for the months of July 1999, August 1999, December 1999, November 1999, September 1999 in respect of the workman of one M/s Hindustan Garments (Exts. WW1/8 to WW1/12); pay slips for the months of March 2004, January 2004, October 2004, July 2004, November 2004, December 2004, May 2004, September 2004, August 2004 in respect of the workman of one M/s Image Fashions, 12/1, Mathura Road, Faridabad (Exts. WW1/13 to WW1/21) do not go to show the employment of the workman with the respondent/management alleged for the duration viz. w.e.f. 1987 till 28.09.2006 when his services are alleged to have been terminated by the respondent/management in addition to the factum of the workman having worked for a continuous period of 240 days with the respondent/management in the year preceding the date of the alleged termination of his services on its part viz. 28.09.06 in the instant case, the onus of proving of which factum was admittedly upon the workman vide the provisions of citations AIR D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 11 out of 12 2006 SC 355 R.M. Yellati Appellant Vs. The Assistant Executive EngineerRespondent; MANU/SC/0115/2002 Range Forest Officer Vs. S.T. Hadimani; MANU/SC/0749/2004 Rajasthan State Ganganagar S Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors; MANU/SC/0842/2004 M.P. Electricity Board Vs. Hari Ram and AIR 2006 SC 56 Batala CoOperative Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Sowaran Singh.
In view of my above observations and findings, I find that the workman has not proved, on record, the factum of his having been in the employment of the respondent/management or having worked with the respondent/management for a continuous period of 240 days in the year preceding the date of the alleged termination of his service on its part viz. 28.09.06 as alleged in the instant case in order for him to be entitled to the protection of the provisions of Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (as amended upto date) qua the same. I accordingly, find that the workman is not entitled to any relief.
The Award is passed. The Ahlmad is directed to send six copies of this award to the appropriate Government. The file be consigned to the Record Room.
Announced in the open court on (Chandra Gupta)
29.09.2012 Presiding Officer Labour CourtX
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
D.I.D. No. 469/06 Page 12 out of 12