Delhi High Court - Orders
Jai Pal & Ors vs Delhi Building And Other Construction ... on 27 April, 2020
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$-5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3001/2020
JAI PAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Shyle Trehan, Advocate, with
Mr.Chirayu Jain, Adv.
(7406073670)
[email protected]
versus
DELHI BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS WELFARE BOARD AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with
Mr.Sanjoy Ghose, ASC, GNCTD
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 27.04.2020 CM Nos.10407-08/2020 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 3001/2020 & CM No.10409/2020 Issue notice. Notice is accepted by Mr.Sanjoy Ghose, Additional Standing Counsel, GNCTD, on behalf of the respondents.
At the outset, Mr.Sanjay Jain, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the respondents, has drawn my attention to the order dated 22.04.2020 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WP(C) 2991/2020, titled Sunil Kumar Aledia vs. Govt. Of NCT of Delhi & Ors., and submits that the issues raised in the present petition are being considered by the Division Bench in the said petition, which is listed on 08.05.2020. He further submits that the respondents are in the process of formulating its response to the said petition, which shall also answer the issues raised in the present petition.
The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that the petitioner no.1 was duly registered under the provisions of the Building and Other Construction Workers' (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] till 2019. He could not apply for the renewal of the said registration for reasons not attributable to the petitioner. Due to the closure of the offices of the respondent no.1 on the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, though the said petitioner has been making efforts to pay the renewal fee, however, has been unable to pay the same. The petitioner no. 1 is being denied the benefit of the Scheme announced by the Respondents to give relief to the construction workers due to COVID-19 pandemic, only for the reason for non-renewal of the registration.
She further submits that the petitioner no.2 could not get himself registered under the Act, however, cannot be denied the benefit under the Scheme. She submits that the registration of the construction workers with the respondent no.1 under the Act has reduced from 5,35,706 (out of which registration of only 1,84,664 workers has been duly renewed till 2019), to only 37,127 workers as on date. This was for reasons attributable to the respondent no.1 and therefore, the petitioner no. 2 can also not be denied the benefit under the Scheme.
As far as the petitioner no. 3 is concerned, she submits that in spite of being duly registered, he has not received the benefit under the Scheme announced by the respondents. Even the helpline number given by the respondents has remained unreachable.
With respect to the petitioner no. 4, she submits that the petitioner no. 4 was registered under the Act till January, 2019, when he reached the age of sixty and could not be registered any further. He had also applied for grant of pension under the Act/Regulations by submitting the requisite fee, however, was not granted pension for reasons not attributed to the petitioner and unknown to the petitioner. She further submits that the petitioner no. 4, over and above the pension amount, would be entitled to the benefit announced in the Scheme as the same has been announced to give relief to the construction workers suffering immense financial hardship due to COVID-19 pandemic.
The learned ASG, however, refutes all allegations that have been made by the petitioners against the respondents, especially with regard to the working of the respondents.
Having considered the submissions made, it is directed that the petitioner no. 3, if found to be duly registered with the respondent no. 1, shall be immediately released the dues under the Scheme announced by the respondents. For this purpose, if any clarification/verification is required, the respondents shall be free to contact the learned counsel for the petitioners for seeking any such clarification/verification, including the bank account details of the said petitioner.
Similarly, the petitioner no. 4, if found entitled to for grant of pensionary benefits under the Act/Regulations by the respondents, would be immediately paid the dues of pension owed to him. In case the respondents wish to seek any clarification/verification from the petitioner no. 4, they shall be free to contact the learned counsel for the petitioners for the same.
Ms. Shyel Trehan, Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that she has details of at least 200 more workers who are similarly placed as the petitioner no. 3 and are duly registered under the Act/Regulations, however, have not received any benefits of the Scheme announced by the respondents. She further submits that she has details of another 280 workers who are similarly placed as petitioner no. 4 and who have attained the age of sixty years and have applied for pensionary benefits, however, such pension has not been granted by the respondents to such workers.
The learned counsel for the petitioners shall share the details, including the supporting documents of such workers, with Mr.Sanjoy Ghose, Additional Standing Counsel, Govt. Of NCT of Delhi. The respondents shall verify the details of such workers and if they are found to be eligible for any payment under the Scheme or pension, the same shall be released to such workers forthwith.
As far as the other issues are concerned, the respondents shall file their counter affidavit/reply within a period of two weeks from today.
List on 20th May, 2020.
This order shall be uploaded on the website of the High Court and copy thereof shall also be provided to the learned counsels on the e-mail address provided.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J APRIL 27, 2020/Arya