Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Sh. Mahender Sah vs M/S Synergy Recyclers on 11 May, 2018

       IN THE COURT OF SH.  RAKESH KUMAR ­ 1
    PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT­X  DWARKA
                COURTS, NEW DELHI.

                                     Ref. No. : F.3(382)13/Ref./WD/Lab./602
                                                           Dated : 25.02.2014
                                                              I.D No.4593/16

Sh. Mahender Sah, 
S/o Sh. Rameshwar Sah,
R/o E­100, Om Vihar, 
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
C/o Rashtriya General Mazdoor Union (Regd.),
B­239, Karampura, New Delhi­15.                      ........ Workman.

                                      VERSUS

M/s Synergy Recyclers, 
Plot No.48/25/20, Hastal Gaon,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi­59.                                    ......... Management.
 


                                   Date of Institution of the case      :  26.03.2014
                                 Date on which reserved for Award : 11.05.2018
                                 Date on which Award is passed      : 11.05.2018
­:A W A R D:­
             The workman named above raised an industrial dispute before
the   Labour   Department   against   the   termination   of   his   services   by   the
management   claiming   that   his   services   have   been   terminated   by   the
management illegally and unjustifiably and the appropriate Government on
being satisfied with regard to existence of an industrial dispute between the
parties, referred the dispute to the Court for adjudication under Section 10
(I) (c) and 12 (5) of the Industrial Disputes Act vide Ref. no.: F.3(382)13/
Ref./WD/Lab./602 dated 25.02.2014 with the following terms of reference:­

        I.D.No.4593/16                                              Page 1 out of 14
                      "Whether the services of Sh. Mahender Sah S/o
                     Sh.   Rameshwar   Sah   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?"
               Fresh reference was received in the matter on 26.03.2014 and
thereafter, the notice was issued to the workman. Statement of claim was
filed by the workman, in which it is stated by the workman that workman
was   working   with   the   management   on   the   post   of   helper   at   last   drawn
monthly wages of Rs.6,500/­ and he was working with the management
since April, 2008.  The management did not issue any appointment letter to
workman.   The management used to take two hours extra work per day
from the workman but did not pay even a single penny towards over time to
him.  The management also enrolled his name in his record since the date of
his joining but management did not provide legal facilities i.e. appointment
letter, minimum wages, casual leave, ESI, Pay Slip, PF, over time wages,
HRA, Attendance Card, Leave Encashment, Leave Book to workman  and
workman used to demand from management to provide the above said legal
facilities, but the management has not provided the same to him. In the year
2012,   the   management   filled   upon   the   ESI   Form   of   workman   and   the
management   did   not   provide   the   other   legal   facilities   to   him.   The
management became annoyed with workman, when he demanded the said
legal   facilities   from   the   Management,   and   it   started   to   get   rid   of   the
workman   but   failed   and   on   31.07.2013,   the   management   has   illegally
terminated the workman from his services without any rhyme or reason,


         I.D.No.4593/16                                                 Page 2 out of 14
 without paying the earned wages for the months of June and July, 2013 that
too without conducting any domestic enquiry against him. The management
has violated the provisions of Section 25F and G of I D Act.  The workman
had filed a complaint against the management before the Assistant Labour
Commissioner,   Nimari   Colony,   New   Delhi   and   on   this   complaint,   the
Labour Inspector had visited the establishment of management and he gave
advise   to   management   to   reinstate   the   workman   and   to   pay   his   unpaid
wages   but   the   management   neither   reinstate   the   workman   not   paid   the
unpaid   wages   to   him.   The   claimant   sent   a   Demand   Notice   to   the
management on 08.09.2013 but despite of service, the Management took no
action nor replied to the said Demand Notice nor reinstated the workman on
the job.  The workman had filed his statement of claim before the Assistant
Labour Commissioner but of no avail. The workman had worked for more
than 240 days with the management in any preceding year. After the illegal
termination, the workman searched the job at many places but could not
find any job and since then he is unemployed. Hence, the workman has
prayed that an award of reinstatement of his service with full back wages
with   all   other   consequential   benefits   may   be   passed   in   favour   of   the
workman and against the management.
               Notice of the statement of claim was issued to the management
and accordingly management appeared in the Court through its Authorized
Representative   and   filed   its   written   statement   wherein   it   has   taken
objections that the workman has not approached the court with clean hand
and present claim has been filed with the sole motive to extort money from
the management. The management is in the scrap rubber product business
of   Synergy   Recyclers   having   its   Registered   Office   at   Plot   No.48/25/20,


         I.D.No.4593/16                                              Page 3 out of 14
 Hastal Village, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi­59. The management started this
business   from   17.05.2008   with   three   employees   and   as   the   business
continued to grow with time, more employees were joined in. The workman
joined   the   management   company   on   01.04.2012   and   when   he   joined,
number of employees at that time were nine. The workman registered the
workman's name in ESIC on 25.06.2012.  The workman used to take many
leaves, that too without any prior information most of the times.   Further
the   workman   mostly   used   to   come   to   office   after   drinking   liquor   and
misbehaved   with   the   staff.   Whenever   other   employees   complained   to
management   about   workman's   bad   behaviour,   he   used   to   say   sorry   and
make false promises of not doing such things again in future.   Further on
10.07.2013, workman came in office after drinking liquor and misbehaved
with   staff   again.   Management   warned   the   workman   for   his   ridiculous
intolerable behaviour but workman shouted over management, used abusive
language and gave threats to employer for filing complaint against them in
Labour Court, with the help of some Union. The workman stopped coming
to office after 10.07.2013 on his own choice.  The workman complained to
the   Labour   Inspector   and   Labour   Inspector   served   notice   to   the
management.   The management presented before the Labour Inspector on
29.07.2013 and gave a sum of Rs.2,400/­ to the workman as 10 days salary
from 01.07.2013 to 10.07.2013 and also agreed to keep the workman on
workman   with   the   conditions   that   he   will   not   misbehave   in   the   office
premises. Accordingly, workman again joined the management company
on   30.07.2013   but   workman's   intentions   were   not   good   as   he   was   seen
taking pictures of office in unlawful manner on the same day and he left
office   before   lunch.     The   workman   is   claiming   to   have   joined   Synergy


         I.D.No.4593/16                                              Page 4 out of 14
 Recycles   in   April,   2008,   whereas,   the   Synergy   Recycler   was   found   in
17.05.2008.  Further in his first complaint, the workman has stated that he
was not provided with ESIC, whereas now the workman admitted that the
ESIC benefits were availed by him.  
              The   rejoinder   to   the   Written   Statement   was   filed   by   the
workman where he is reiterated and reconfirmed the averments made in the
Statement of claim and denied and controverted the averments made by the
management in the Written Statement. 
              From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were
framed vide order dated 22.09.2015:­
                    (i)   Whether the claimant/workman came to the office
                          of   the   management   on   10.07.2013   after   drinking
                          liquor   and   misbehaved   with   the   staff   of   the
                          respondent, behaved in an indecent manner and used

abusive language, threatened the employer, if so, its effect?  OPM

(ii) Whether the workman himself stopped coming for duty   after   10.07.2013   and   thereby   abandoned   the job himself as alleged by the management, if so, its effect?  OPM

(iii) Whether the management has made the payment of Rs.2,400/­ to the workman towards 10 days salary from   01st   July,   2013   to   10th   July,   2013   in   the presence   of   Labour   Inspector   as   alleged   by   the management, if so, its effect?  OPM

(iv) Whether   the   services   of   the   workman   were I.D.No.4593/16 Page 5 out of 14 terminated   by   the   management   illegally   and unjustifiably as claimed by the workman, if so, its effect?  OPW

(v) Whether   the   workman   is   entitled   to   the   relief claimed in the statement of claim?     OPW

(vi) Relief.

No other issue arose or pressed and the case was adjourned for workman evidence.  

  Thereafter on 13.10.2016, workman appeared in the witness box as WW1 and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit as Ex.WW1/A. He has relied upon documents Ex.WW1/1 to Ex. WW1/3. Ex.WW1/1 is the carbon   copy   of   Demand   Notice   dated   08.09.2013;   Ex.WW1/2   is   the original postal receipt and Ex.WW1/3 is the carbon copy of statement of claim filed before Assistant Labour Commissioner. Then the case was fixed on 04.01.2017 for cross examination of workman by management, as none was present on behalf of management on that day.   Thereafter, workman did not appear before the court, except on 05.04.2017 and vide order dated 30.10.2017, the opportunity of the workman to complete its evidence was closed and the case was fixed for management evidence for 05.02.2018. On 05.02.2018, none appeared on behalf of management and as such the case was adjourned for 27.02.2018 for management evidence.   On 27.02.2018, nobody was present on behalf of management but an application on behalf of workmen was moved for setting aside the order dated 30.10.2017 and for reopening of workman evidence. Since nobody was present on behalf of the management on that day, so application was taken on record and the case was fixed for 05.04.2018 for reply and arguments on the said application.

I.D.No.4593/16 Page 6 out of 14 On 05.04.2018 also neither anybody was present on behalf of management nor   any   reply   to   the   application   was   filed   and   in   these   circumstances, application   of   workman   was   allowed   and   the   workman   was   given   an opportunity   to   complete   its   evidence   i.e.   by   way   of   facing   the   cross examination by the management subject to payment of cost of Rs.800/­ and the case was fixed for 26.04.2018. On 26.04.2018 also, nobody appeared on behalf   of   management   despite   of   several   calls   to   cross   examine   the workman and accordingly opportunity of the management to cross examine WW­1 was closed and case was fixed for today for leading of management evidence.   Today   also,   none   appeared   on   behalf   of   management   and accordingly, opportunity of management to lead evidence was closed vide the order of even date and final arguments were also heard in details.  File perused.   

  Issue wise discussion is as under:­ For   the   sake   of   convenience,   I   shall   take   issue   no.1,   2   &   3 together.

­:ISSUE No.1, 2 & 3:­
                          (i)    Whether   the   claimant/workman   came   to   the
                                 office   of   the   management   on   10.07.2013   after

drinking liquor and misbehaved with the staff of the   respondent,   behaved   in   an   indecent   manner and   used   abusive   language,   threatened   the employer, if so, its effect?  OPM

(ii) Whether   the   workman   himself   stopped   coming for duty after 10.07.2013 and thereby abandoned the job himself as alleged by the management, if I.D.No.4593/16 Page 7 out of 14 so, its effect?  OPM

(iii) Whether the management has made the payment of   Rs.2,400/­   to   the   workman   towards   10   days salary from 01st July, 2013 to 10th July, 2013 in the  presence  of   Labour   Inspector  as   alleged   by the management, if so, its effect?        OPM   The   onus   to   prove   these   issues   have   been   placed   upon   the management.

In   its   Written   Statement,   the   management   has   claimed   that management is in the scrap rubber product business of Synergy Recyclers having   its   Registered   Office   at  Plot   No.48/25/20,   Hastal   Village,   Uttam Nagar,   New   Delhi­59.   The   management   started   this   business   from 17.05.2008 with three employees and as the business continued to grow with   time,   more   employees   were   joined   in.   The   workman   joined   the management   company   on   01.04.2012   and   when   he   joined,   number   of employees at that time were nine. The workman registered the workman's name in ESIC on 25.06.2012.  The workman used to take many leaves, that too without any prior information most of the times.  Further the workman mostly used to come to office after drinking liquor and misbehaved with the staff.   Whenever   other   employees   complained   to   management   about workman's bad behaviour, he used to say sorry and make false promises of not doing such things again in future.   Further on 10.07.2013, workman came   in   office   after   drinking   liquor   and   misbehaved   with   staff   again. Management warned the workman for his ridiculous intolerable behaviour but workman shouted over management, used abusive language and gave threats to employer for filing complaint against them in Labour Court, with I.D.No.4593/16 Page 8 out of 14 the   help   of   some   Union.   The   workman   stopped   coming   to   office   after 10.07.2013 on his own choice.   The workman complained to the Labour Inspector   and   Labour   Inspector   served   notice   to   the   management.     The management presented before the Labour Inspector on 29.07.2013 and gave a sum of Rs.2,400/­ to the workman as 10 days salary from 01.07.2013 to 10.07.2013  and  also agreed  to  keep the workman  on workman  with  the conditions that he will not misbehave in the office premises. Accordingly, workman   again   joined   the   management   company   on   30.07.2013   but workman's intentions were not good as he was seen taking pictures of office in unlawful manner on the same day and he left office before lunch.  The workman   is   claiming   to   have   joined   Synergy   Recycles   in   April,   2008, whereas, the Synergy Recycler was found in 17.05.2008. 

In support of its said claim/defence, the management has neither led  any  evidence on  record  nor lead  any  arguments, so these issues are liable   to   be   decided   against   the   management.   Same   stand   decided accordingly. 

­:ISSUE No.4:­ Whether   the   services   of   the   workman   were terminated   by   the   management   illegally   and unjustifiably   as   claimed   by   the   workman,   if so, its effect?  OPW   The onus to prove this issue is placed upon the workman.

In   his   Statement   of   Claim,   the   workman   has   claimed   that workman was working with the management on the post of helper at last drawn   monthly   wages   of   Rs.6,500/­   and   he   was   working   with   the management   since   April,   2008.     The   management   did   not   issue   any I.D.No.4593/16 Page 9 out of 14 appointment letter to workman.   The management used to take two hours extra work per day from the workman but did not pay even a single penny towards over time to him.  The management also enrolled his name in his record since the date of his joining but management did not provide  legal facilities i.e. appointment letter, minimum wages, casual leave, ESI, Pay Slip,   PF,   over   time   wages,   HRA,   Attendance   Card,   Leave   Encashment, Leave Book to workman  and workman used to demand from management to   provide   the   above   said   legal   facilities,   but   the   management   has   not provided the same to him. In the year 2012, the management filled upon the ESI Form of workman and the management did not provide the other legal facilities to him. The management became annoyed with workman, when he demanded the said legal facilities from the Management, and it started to get rid of the workman but failed and on 31.07.2013, the management has illegally terminated the workman from his services without any rhyme or reason, without paying the earned wages for the months of June and July, 2013 that too without conducting any domestic enquiry against him.

On the other hand, in its Written Statement the management has claimed that the workman is claiming to have joined Synergy Recycles in April, 2008, whereas, the Synergy Recycler was found in 17.05.2008.  The workman  joined  the management company  on 01.04.2012  and his name was registered in ESIC on 25.06.2012.   The workman used to take many leaves, that too without any prior information most of the times.   Further the   workman   mostly   used   to   come   to   office   after   drinking   liquor   and misbehaved with the staff. On 10.07.2013, workman came in office after drinking liquor and misbehaved with staff again and when workman was warned of his bad behaviour, he shouted over management, used abusive I.D.No.4593/16 Page 10 out of 14 language and gave threats to employer for filing complaint against them in Labour Court, with the help of some Union. The workman stopped coming to   office   after   10.07.2013   on   his   own   choice.   Upon   the   complaint   of workman   before   Labour   Inspector,   management   appeared   before   the Labour   Inspector   on   29.07.2013   and   gave   a   sum   of   Rs.2,400/­   to   the workman as 10 days salary from 01.07.2013 to 10.07.2013 and also agreed to   keep   the   workman   on   workman   with   the   conditions   that   he   will   not misbehave in the office premises. Accordingly, workman again joined the management company on 30.07.2013 but workman's intentions were not good as he was seen taking pictures of office in unlawful manner on the same day and he left office before lunch.  

In   order   to   discharge   the   onus,   the   workman   has   himself appeared in the witness box as WW­1. In his evidence tendered by way of affidavit,   the   workman   has   reiterated   that   he  was   working   with   the management   on   the   post   of   helper   at   last   drawn   monthly   wages   of Rs.6,500/­ and he was working with the management since April, 2008. The   management   used   to   take   two   hours   extra   work   per   day   from   the workman but did not pay even a single penny towards over time to him. The management also enrolled his name in his record since the date of his joining   but management   did   not  provide  legal  facilities  i.e.   appointment letter, minimum wages, casual leave, ESI, Pay Slip, PF, over time wages, HRA, Attendance Card, Leave Encashment, Leave Book to workman and workman used to demand from management to provide the above said legal facilities, but the management has not provided the same to him. In the year 2012,   the   management   filled   upon   the   ESI   Form   of   workman   and   the management   did   not   provide   the   other   legal   facilities   to   him.   The I.D.No.4593/16 Page 11 out of 14 management became annoyed with workman, when he demanded the said legal   facilities   from   the   Management,   and   it   started   to   get   rid   of   the workman   but   failed   and   on   31.07.2013,   the   management   has   illegally terminated the workman from his services without any rhyme or reason, without paying the earned wages for the months of June and July, 2013 that too without conducting any domestic enquiry against him.   

On the contrary, management led no evidence in support of its defence that workman used to take many leaves, that too without any prior information most of the times and mostly he used to come to office after drinking liquor and misbehaved with the staff and on 10.07.2013, workman came in office after drinking liquor and misbehaved with staff again and when   workman   was   warned   of   his   bad   behaviour,   he   shouted   over management, used abusive language and gave threats to employer for filing complaint against them in Labour Court, with the help of some Union. The workman stopped coming to office after 10.07.2013 on his own choice.   As   per   the   claim   of   workman,   he  was   working   with   the management   on   the   post   of   helper   at   last   drawn   monthly   wages   of Rs.6,500/­ and he was working with the management since April, 2008 and his services were  terminated by the management on 31.07.2013 illegally and unjustifiably.  Regarding date of employment, it has been stated in the Written   Statement   that   workman   joined   the   company   on   01.04.2012 (however, there is nothing on record placed regarding the said fact). Since the employment of the workman with the management is admitted fact, it is for the management to prove that the workman did not join his duties after 10.07.2013.  As such there is nothing on record to show that the workman himself did not turn up to join his duties from 10.07.2013 onwards.   No I.D.No.4593/16 Page 12 out of 14 letter/correspondence or postal receipts / acknowledgment card etc has been placed   on   record   on   behalf   of   management   to   show   that   workman   was called through the same to join his duties. Accordingly, it is held that the services of the workman were terminated by the management.   Since no notice, notice pay, compensation or any other consequential benefits were given to the workman prior to termination of his services, the termination of the services of the workman by the management on 31.07.2013 is illegal and   unjustified.   Issue   no.4   is   accordingly,   decided   in   favour   of   the workman and against the management. 

­:ISSUE No.5:­

 (v) Whether   the   workman   is   entitled   to   the   relief claimed in the statement of claim?            OPW In view of my findings on foregoing issues, this issue is liable to be decided in favour of workman and same stands decided accordingly. ­:RELIEF:­     In   his   statement   of   claim   the   workman   has   prayed   for   a directions   to   the   management  to   reinstate   the   workman,   continuity   of service with full back wages alongwith consequential benefits etc. and also prayed to pass an order of earned wages for the month of June and July, 2013   in   favour   of   workman   and   against   the   management   but   in   the considered opinion of the court this is not a fit case for the reinstatement, as a considerable period of time has been elapsed and the end of justice will be served if a lumpsum compensation is awarded to the workman instead of reinstatement, backwages, and other consequential benefits. Accordingly, in view of the above discussion and terms of reference, and keeping in view the tenure of service of the workman with the management and his last I.D.No.4593/16 Page 13 out of 14 drawn   salary   a   lumpsum   compensation   of   Rs.50,000/­   (Rupees   Fifty Thousand Only) is awarded to the workman instead of reinstatement and backwages and other consequential benefits. The management is directed to pay the said compensation amount of Rs.50,000/­ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the workman within three months from the date of publication of award.   If the management failed to pay the said amount of Rs.50,000/­ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the workman within the stipulated period, the workman is at liberty to get recover the said compensation amount of Rs.50,000/­   (Rupees   Fifty   Thousand   Only)   from   the   management   along with an interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of passing of award till the date of recovery of the amount of compensation. The award is passed accordingly and reference is answered accordingly. Requisite number of copies of this award be sent to the competent authority for necessary compliance. File be consigned to the Record Room.


Announced in the open Court  
on 11.05.2018                               (RAKESH KUMAR­I)
                                  Presiding Officer Labour Court­X
                                            Dwarka Courts, Delhi.     


                                                              Digitally signed
                                                              by RAKESH
                                         RAKESH               KUMAR
                                         KUMAR                Date:
                                                              2018.05.14
                                                              15:01:12 +0530




        I.D.No.4593/16                                        Page 14 out of 14