Delhi District Court
Baby vs M/S Ayshman Hospital And Health ... on 31 October, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. ARUN KUMAR GARG
PRESIDING OFFICER : LABOUR COURT-III
ROUSE AVENUE COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI.
CNR No. DLCT13-002106-2024
Ref. No. F.24(9)/R/180/SWD/Lab./26 dated 04.03.2024
LIR No. 406/2024
Smt. Baby W/o Sh. Ram Babu Mishra,
R/o S-6/7, Nangli Vihar, Part-Ist,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043
Mobile No. 9582392286
Other Address of Workman: Gao Chauta, Post Ahimori Bhaya,
Kontoul Thana, Bisfi Jila, Madhubani, Bihar-847304.
Through:
Sh. Sikandar Boudhik (Secretary),
Pragatisheel Engineering and General Mazdoor
Union (Regd. 4530),
W-30/B-157, WSS Jawahar Camp, Near Mayapuri Flyover,
Lakkarpur Mandi, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015
Mobile No. 9716993340
Also Through:
Sh. Sanjay Sharma, AR of Workman,
Mobile No. 9313638201
Email ID: [email protected] ..... Workman
VERSUS
M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services
Plot No. 2, Sector 12, Ashirwad Chowk,
Dwarka, New Delhi-110075
Through:
Dr. Ramkumar Yadav,
Ph. No. 37031100
Also Through:
Sh. Darpan Kumar, Administrator/AR of Management,
Address: M/s. Ayushman Hospital,
LIR No.406/2024
Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services
Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 1 of 23
Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi-110075
Mobile No. +91-9990939566,
E-Mail of Management:
[email protected] ..... Management
Date of Institution of the case : 15.04.2024
Date on which Award is passed : 31.10.2025
AWARD:
1.By this Award, I will dispose off the claim of Workman filed on 17.09.2024, pursuant to reference order no. F.24(9)/R/180/SWD/Lab./26 dated 04.03.2024, under Section 10(1)(C) & 12(5) of Industrial Disputes Act, received by this Court on 15.04.2024, from the office of Deputy Labour Commissioner(South West), Labour Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, whereby, following issue has been referred to this Court for adjudication:-
"Whether the Workman Smt. Baby W/o Sh. Ram Babu Mishra (Aged-42 Years), Mobile No. 9582392286, Aadhar Card No. 489269693699 has absenting from duties own his own or his services have been terminated illegally an/or unjustifiably by the Management; if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?"
2. Brief case of Workman, as per her statement of claim, is that she had been in continuous employment of Management as GDA/ Aaya since 01.06.2013 against last drawn wages of Rs. 14,500/- per month until her services were illegally terminated by Management on 05.04.2021. It is further her case that during her employment with Management, Management did not provide her with minimum facilities such as-appointment letter, bonus, EL/CL, overtime wages, leave book and minimum wages etc. It LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 2 of 23 is further alleged by Workman that during the course of her employment, Management issued merely an identity card to Workman on 02.07.2018 mentioning her employee code as 1613 and on 31.10.2019, issued an offer letter to Workman reflecting her date of interview as 31.10.2019 and date of joining as 01.11.2019, which was accepted by her in the fear of employment because Management assured her that it shall not effect the period of her employment with Management.
3. On 07.12.2020, it is further alleged, during performance of her duties, Workman slipped on the floor and got her left leg fractured for which she was operated upon in the Management hospital and was discharged on 12.12.2020 with an advice to take rest for four months and an assurance that Management shall bear all the expenses of treatment and shall continue to make payment of her wages for the period of rest.
4. On 05.04.2021, according to her, when she reported on duty, after seeing her condition, Management refused to take her back on duty despite the fact that she had met with accident during performance of her duties and became handicapped due to wrong operation of her leg by Management. Management, according to her, has failed to reinstate her into the job despite receipt of demand notice dated 10.03.2022 and despite complaint as well as claim of Workman before the Labour Authorities, though, representative of Management admitted before Labour Inspector that Workman had worked with Management until 07.01.2021.
5. Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to her, LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 3 of 23 termination of her services by Management is wholly illegal, being in violation of provisions of Section 25F, G and H of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and since she is unemployed with effect from the date of illegal termination of her services by Management, she is entitled to her reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of service and all consequential benefits.
6. Management appeared in response to notice of statement of claim and filed its written statement on 16.10.2024. In its written statement, Management has denied that Workman was under
employment of Management since 01.06.2013 until 05.04.2021. Rather, according to Management, she had joined the services of Management as an Aaya w.e.f. 01.07.2013 and was not in continuous service, in as much as, she kept on resigning and rejoining Management as per her convenience and comfort. It is further the case of Management that after joining in July 2013, Workman firstly resigned vide resignation dated 14.04.2018 due to personal reasons and her last working day pursuant to the said resignation was 15.05.2018. As per undertaking dated 08.06.2018, according to Management, Workman acknowledged having received all her dues and salary till 15.05.2018.
7. Subsequently, according to Management, Workman rejoined the Management in July 2018 and again resigned in December 2018. Thereafter, as per written statement of Management, Workman has rejoined the employment of Management w.e.f. 01.11.2019 and had stopped reporting on her duty w.e.f. 05.12.2020 citing her inability to work due to Covid- 19 pandemic and admission of Covid patients in the hospital.
LIR No.406/2024Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 4 of 23 Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to Management, Workman herself had abandoned her duties with Management and her services were never terminated by Management.
8. It has further been alleged in the written statement that Management was providing all statutory facilities to Workman, including timely payment of her wages, during the entire period of her employment with Management and after the Workman stopped reporting on duty with Management w.e.f. 05.12.2020, Management credited her full and final salary for the month of November and 5-6 days of December 2020 in her account, besides, making a payment of Rs. 36,004/- towards full and final settlement of bonus for the period July 2018 to December 2020 pursuant to her complaint against Management before the Labour Officer.
9. It is further the case of Management that the Workman had worked with Management until December 2020 and pursuant to her request for issuance of experience certificate, an experience certificate was issued by Management in her name on 31.01.2021. Management has denied that Workman suffered any fracture during the course of her duties at the establishment of Management. Rather, according to Management, she was suffering from CTEV(neglected since birth) and had submitted the certificate dated 07.01.2009 for the persons with disabilities at the time of her joining the Management. It is further submitted that Workman approached ESI centres for surgery of her aforesaid foot, however, ESI centres had advised her to take medicines for few weeks. Unsatisfied with the approach of ESI, LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 5 of 23 according to Management, Workman contacted the Director of Management for her surgery and hence, at the request of Workman, Director of Management, who is an Ortho Surgeon, performed Pantalar Arthrodesis surgery of Workman on humanitarian grounds free of cost and after she was discharged, she was capable to walk and perform her duties. When the Management, it is further alleged, directed her to resume her duties, she flatly refused to rejoin due to her reluctance to work in Covid Care Unit.
10. Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to Management, Management was constrained to make payment of her full and final dues through bank transfer, whereafter, the said unit was closed in June 2021. Management has thus categorically denied that Workman had ever reported on her duty on 05.04.2021 or that Management had ever refused to take her back on duty. Management has thus prayed for dismissal of present claim of Workman with exemplary cost, while, alleging that services of Workman were never terminated by Management.
11. No rejoinder to the written statement of Management was however filed on behalf of Workman despite opportunity. Thus, on the basis of pleadings of parties, following issues were settled by this Court vide order dated 11.02.2025:-
(i) Whether the Claimant had herself abandoned the services of the Management w.e.f. 05.12.2020? (OPM)
(ii) Whether the services of the Workman have been illegally terminated by the Management w.e.f.
05.04.2021? (OPW) LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 6 of 23
(iii) Relief, if any.
12. Workman has thereafter examined herself as WW-1 i.e. as the sole witness in support of her case and tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.WW1/A along with following documents:
(i) Ex.WW1/1: Copy of identity card of Workman issued by Management.
(ii) Ex.WW1/2: Copy of offer letter dated 31.10.2019 issued by Management to Workman.
(iii) Ex.WW1/3: Copy of experience certificate dated 31.01.2021 issued by Management to Workman.
(iv) Ex.WW1/4: Copy of complaint dated 08.02.2022 filed by Workman through Union before Labour Officer, Labour Department, Hari Nagar, New Delhi- 110064.
(v) Ex.WW1/5 (colly): Copy of proceedings sheets dated 18.02.2022, 03.03.2022, 15.03.2022 and 29.03.2022 before Labour Officer.
(vi) Ex.WW1/6: Copy of complaint dated 04.08.2022 filed by Workman through his Union before Labour Officer, Labour Department, Hari Nagar, New Delhi- 110064.
(vii) Ex.WW1/7: Copy of calculation letter dated 02.03.2023 regarding full and final dues of Workman sent by Management to the Labour Inspector, Office of the Joint Commissioner (South West District), Labour Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, DTC Colony, Pratap Nagar, Hari Nagar, New Delhi- 110064.
(viii) Ex.WW1/8: Copy of demand notice dated 10.03.2022 sent by Workman to Management.
(ix) Ex.WW1/9: Copy of postal receipt regarding dispatch of aforesaid demand notice.
(x) Ex.WW1/10: Copy of statement of claim filed by Workman before Conciliation Officer, Labour LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 7 of 23 Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Hari Nagar, Pratap Nagar, New Delhi-110064
(xi) Mark-WW1/11: Copy of e-Pehchan card of Workman issued by ESIC.
13. WW-1 was duly cross-examined by Ld. AR for Management and during her cross-examination, she was confronted with following documents:
(i) Ex.WW1/M1: Original resignation letter of Workman purportedly accepted by Management on
14.04.2018.
(ii) Ex.WW1/M2: No dues form submitted by Workman to Management at the time of her resignation.
(iii) Ex.WW1/M3: Offer letter dated 25.06.2018 issued by Management to Workman.
(iv) Ex.WW1/M4: Appointment letter dated 09.07.2018 issued by Management to Workman.
(v) Ex.WW1/M5: Copy of disability certificate of Workman dated 07.01.2009.
(vi) Ex.WW1/M6 (colly): Copy of entire medical record of Workman regarding her leg's surgery at Management hospital.
(vii) Ex.WW1/M7: Show cause notice dated
11.01.2020.
(viii) Ex.WW1/M8: Copy of reply of Workman to the aforesaid show cause notice.
(ix) Ex.WW1/M9 (colly): Copy of letter dated 02.03.2023 of Management addressed to the Labour Inspector, Office of Joint Labour Commissioner (South-West), Labour Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi along with a copy of cheque bearing no. 456468 dated 28.02.2023 for a sum of Rs. 36,004/- drawn on IDBI Bank, Plot No. 48, Sector-12 B, Dwarka, New LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 8 of 23 Delhi-110075.
14. No other witness was examined on behalf of Workman despite opportunity and hence, on a separate statement of Workman, Workman's evidence was closed vide order dated 26.04.2025.
15. Management has thereafter examined its Administrator Sh. Darpan Kumar as MW-1 i.e. as the sole witness in support of its case. He has tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A. MW-1 has relied upon the documents already Ex.WW1/M1 to Ex.WW1/M9, besides, the following documents:
(i) Ex.MW1/1: Authority letter in his name.
(ii) Ex.MW1/3: Undertaking of Workman dated 08.06.2018 given to Management.
(iii) Mark-MW1/6: Copy of salary sheet of Workman for the month of November 2020.
(iv) Mark-MW1/7: Copy of bank statement of Management.
(v) Mark-MW1/8: Copy of payment voucher and cheque dated 28.02.2023.
(vi) Ex.MW1/10 (colly): Copy of offer letter dated 31.10.2019 and appointment letter dated 06.11.2019.
(vii) Mark-MW1/12: Copy of complaint lodged by the patient against Workman.
(viii) Ex.MW1/14: Copy of offer letter dated 01.07.2013.
(ix) Mark-MW1/15: Copy of letter of withdrawal of hospital registration certificate along with cancellation order dated 11.03.2022.
16. MW-1 was duly cross-examined by Ld. AR for Workman.
LIR No.406/2024Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 9 of 23 No other witness was examined on behalf of Management despite opportunity and eventually, on the submission of Ld. AR of Management, Management's evidence was closed vide order dated 29.05.2025.
17. Final arguments on behalf of both the parties were thereafter heard. It is submitted by Ld. AR for Workman that Workman has been able to prove all the averments made by her in her statement of claim by way of her uncontroverted testimony in the form of affidavit Ex.WW1/A, which is duly corroborated by the documents tendered by her in her evidence. He submits that there is no dispute between the parties that Workman had joined the services of Management on 01.06.2013 and had continued to work until 05.04.2021 as an Aaya against last drawn monthly wages of Rs. 14,500/-. The only dispute, sought to be raised by Management in its written statement, according to him, is qua the continuation of service of Workman in the employment of Management, in as much as, Management has alleged that Workman resigned from her services with Management on two occasions.
18. He submits that though in support of its aforesaid plea, Management has produced certain documents, however, the aforesaid documents reflect different dates of joining of Workman. He further submits that despite the Workman being in employment of Management since the year 2013, identity card in her name was issued by Management only in the year 2018. On the other hand, according to him, offer letter Ex. WW1/2 reflects the date of her joining as 31.01.2019. He further submits that the LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 10 of 23 experience certificate Ex. WW1/3, under the signatures of Mr. Darpan Kumar on behalf of Management, reflects that Workman had continuously worked with Management since 13.06.2013 until 07.12.2020. The admission on the part of Management in the aforesaid certificate Ex. WW1/3, according to him, is sufficient to falsify the claim of Management in its written statement that Workman had not continuously worked with Management and had tendered resignation on two occasions.
19. It is further submitted by him that as per the proceedings Ex.WW1/5(colly) conducted by Labour Inspector, representative of Management had duly admitted the Workman to be in employment of Management until 07.01.2021. Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to him, the entire case of Management is fraught with material contradictions, in as much as, though, as per MW-1, last working day of Workman with Management was 05.12.2020, however, as per admissions of representative of Management before Labour Inspector in proceedings Ex.WW1/5, the same was 07.01.2021. On the contrary, according to him, as per written statement of Management, last working day of Workman with management was 07.12.2020.
20. Ld. AR for Workman has also relied upon a letter dated 02.03.2023 Ex.WW1/7, submitted by Management to Labour Inspector, admitting that Workman was in continuous employment of Management since 02.07.2018 to 05.12.2020, to contend that the said document contradicts the case of Management as per its written statement that Workman had LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 11 of 23 resigned from the services of Management in December 2018. Had there been any truth in the plea of Management to the effect that Workman had resigned in the month of December 2018 and had again joined the services of Management in the year 2019, according to him, there was no occasion for Management to make the payment of bonus to Workman for the period July 2018 to December 2020.
21. He further submits that the best evidence qua employment of Workman with Management was available with Management, however, as per deposition of MW-1, the attendance record of employees of Management for the relevant period had already been destroyed. Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to him, Workman could not have produced any direct proof of her employment with Management, however, she has been able to establish her continuous employment with Management since 01.06.2013 until 05.04.2021 not only through her uncontroverted testimony, but also, through the admissions of Management which are duly corroborated by the documents tendered by her in her evidence. Ld. AR for Workman has thus prayed for an award in favour of Workman in terms of prayer made by her in her statement of claim.
22. On the other hand, Ld. AR for Management submits that though Workman has alleged herself to be in continuous employment of Management since 01.06.2013 until 05.04.2021, however, she has failed to produce any document in support of her aforesaid plea. On the contrary, according to him, she has initially admitted her signatures on the resignation letter dated LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 12 of 23 14.04.2018 (Ex. WW1/M1), however, later on, she has denied her signatures on the aforesaid letter. He submits that Workman has also admitted her signatures on no dues form Ex. WW1/M2 which was submitted by her to Management at the time of her resignation. He further submits that Workman has wrongly denied her signatures on offer letter Ex. WW1/M3 and appointment letter Ex. WW1/M4.
23. Be that as it may, according to him, onus to prove illegal termination of her services w.e.f. 05.04.2021, by the Management, was upon Workman, however, she has failed to lead any evidence to prove the aforesaid fact. He submits that the entire testimony of WW-1 is fraught with contradictions and she has failed to produce any document to prove illegal termination of her services by Management w.e.f. 05.04.2021. He further submits that at one place, Workman was found alleging that she was on one month leave w.e.f. 13.12.2020, however, at another place, she was found taking a plea to the effect that Dr. Raj Kumar of the Management hospital had advised her rest for a period of three months (15 days at a time). He submits that the first complaint alleging termination of her services by Management was admittedly made by Workman in the month of February 2022 i.e. after waiting for over a period of one year since the date of her alleged termination w.e.f. 05.04.2021. He further submits that Workman has failed to produce any fitness certificate to prove that she had reported on duty at the establishment of Management on 05.04.2021, after availing medical leaves for a period of four months as per the advice of Dr. Raj Kumar.
LIR No.406/2024Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 13 of 23
24. Under the aforesaid circumstances, according to him, delay, on the part of Workman, in approaching the labour department, alleging illegal termination of her services w.e.f. 05.04.2021, fortifies the claim of Management to the effect that she herself had abandoned the services of Management and her services were never terminated by Management on 05.04.2021. In fact, according to him, Workman herself had admitted during her cross-examination that her last working day with Management was 07.12.2020 meaning thereby that after 07.12.2020, she had never reported on duty at the establishment of Management. Ld. AR for Management has thus prayed for dismissal of claim of Workman with exemplary cost.
25. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of parties and have carefully perused the material available on record. My issue-wise findings on the issues, settled by this Court vide order dated 11.02.2025, are as follows:-
Issue no. (ii): Whether the services of the Workman have been illegally terminated by the Management w.e.f. 05.04.2021? (OPW)
26. Onus to prove the aforesaid issue was upon Workman. As has already been observed hereinabove, in order to discharge the aforesaid onus, Workman has examined herself as the sole witness in support of her case and tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.WW1/A. No doubt, in Para 9 of her affidavit, she has deposed that after completion of rest for a period of four months as per assurance of Management, when, on 05.04.2021 she reported on duty, Management refused to take her back on duty despite the fact that she had met with accident during LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 14 of 23 performance of her duties at the establishment of Management and had become handicapped due to wrong operation of her leg by the doctors of Management.
27. The aforesaid testimony of Workman, in her affidavit Ex.WW1/A, however, could not withstood the test of her cross- examination. Upon a careful scrutiny of deposition of Workman, it is apparent that during her cross-examination, she has contradicted her own case not only qua her last working day with Management, but also, qua the date of her reporting on duty after discharge from the hospital on 12.12.2020 and the date of her termination.
28. It is significant to note in this regard that contrary to the averments made by her, in her statement of claim as well as in her evidence by way of affidavit, during her cross-examination dated 26.04.2025, she has initially deposed that after her discharge from the hospital on 12.12.2020, post-surgery of her leg, she reported on duty at the hospital on 13.12.2020, however, Dr. Raj Kumar advised her to come back for duty after one month. She has further deposed that when after expiry of one month, she again visited the hospital, Ms. Anuradha, working in the HR Department of Management, had taken copies of her aadhar card, PAN card, four photographs and police verification form, besides, cancelled cheque and directed her to report on duty on the next day. Further, according to her, when she reported on her duty on the next day, she was asked to look for another job at any other place. From the aforesaid deposition, during her cross-examination dated 26.04.2025, it is apparent LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 15 of 23 that the services of Workman were allegedly terminated by Management after about one month from her discharge dated 12.12.2020 i.e. somewhere in the month of January 2021.
29. Moreover, during her further cross-examination, she has once again contradicted herself by deposing that after her admission in the hospital for surgery and prior to her surgery in the month of December 2020, she had requested Dr. Raj Kumar to recruit her daughter in her place, while, pleading her helplessness, however, Dr. Raj Kumar advised her not to spoil the life of her daughter and directed the HR Department to continue her services while granting her fifteen days leave at a time, with a further direction to extend the same for a period of three months. The aforesaid deposition of Workman, not only, indicates her intention to leave the services of Management, but, also suggests that the instructions to HR Department of Management, if at all, were given for grant of three months' leave to Workman, which is contrary to her stand in the statement of claim as well as evidence by way of affidavit, that after expiry of her leave period of four months, she reported on her duty at the establishment of Management on 05.04.2021.
30. During her further cross-examination, she has deposed that the experience certificate Ex.WW1/3 was issued in her name by Mr. Darpan Kumar, from HR Department of Management, on his own in the month of April 2021 when she had first reported on duty at the establishment of Management after her discharge from the hospital on 12.12.2020 and after conclusion of three months leave period granted to her as per directions of Dr. Raj LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 16 of 23 Kumar. A bare perusal of certificate Ex.WW1/3, however, shows that the same had purportedly been issued on 31.01.2021 certifying that Workman had lastly worked with Management until 07.12.2020.
31. Moreover, the period of three months' leave from the date of her discharge from hospital post-surgery on 12.12.2020, as alleged by Workman, must have concluded on 12.03.2021 and hence, there was no occasion for the Workman to first report on duty at the establishment of Management in the month of April 2021. It is besides the fact that Workman has failed to produce any document to prove that she had ever been advised any rest by Dr. Raj Kumar or was on medical leave for a period of 3/4 months since the date of her discharge from the hospital on 12.12.2020.
32. It is further significant to note in this regard that, though, Workman has alleged that she had to undergo surgery of her left leg due to the fracture, caused during performance of her duties at the Management hospital on 07.12.2020, however, medical documents (Ex.WW1/M6(colly)) of her treatment at Management hospital reflect that the aforesaid surgery was conducted, not on account of any fracture having been caused to the left leg of Workman, but, for treatment of her neglected CTEV i.e. the disability, which she was suffering since her birth as per the disability certificate Ex.WW1//M5.
33. In view of the aforesaid material contradictions in the testimony of Workman, in my considered opinion, this Court shall not be able to act upon her uncorroborated testimony, to LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 17 of 23 record a finding in her favour qua illegal termination of her services by Management on 05.04.2021.
34. Ld. AR for Workman has relied upon various contradictions in the case of Management qua the length of service of Workman, during her employment with Management, to contend that the aforesaid contradictions are sufficient to discharge the onus of Workman to prove illegal termination of her services by Management w.e.f. 05.04.2021 at least on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities, since, admittedly, the Management had not issued any formal termination letter in the name of Workman and the record of attendance of Workman for the relevant period had admittedly been destroyed by Management.
35. I do not find any force in the aforesaid submission made on behalf of Workman. No doubt, there are contradictions in various documents, issued by Management to Workman, and the documents submitted by Management before the Labour Department, vis-a-vis the documents tendered by Management before this Court, qua the length of service of Workman with Management, however, in my considered opinion, the length of services of Workman with Management is not relevant for adjudication of present claim of Workman, so long as, there is no dispute between the parties to the present claim that the Workman had worked with Management for a continuous period of more than one year immediately prior to the date of her alleged termination.
36. It is settled legal position that the case of Workman, in an LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 18 of 23 industrial dispute qua illegal termination of her services, must stand on its own legs and the Workman cannot be allowed to prove her case merely by relying upon the deficiencies/lacunae, if any, in the defence of Management. Even if, it is assumed for the sake of arguments that Management has failed to prove voluntary abandonment of her services by the Workman after 05.12.2020, in my considered opinion, the same shall not amount to automatic proof of the fact that services of Workman were terminated by Management on 05.04.2021, more so, when, in view of observations made hereinabove, Workman has failed to lead any cogent evidence to prove the aforesaid fact.
37. Issue no. (ii) is thus decided against Workman.
Issue no. (i): Whether the Claimant had herself abandoned the services of the Management w.e.f. 05.12.2020? (OPM)
38. Onus to prove the aforesaid issue was upon Management. As has already been observed hereinabove, in order to discharge the aforesaid onus, Management has examined its Administrator Sh. Darpan Kumar as the sole witness, who has tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A. In Para 4 of his affidavit, MW-1 has categorically deposed that the Workman had lastly worked with Management till 05.12.2020. Further, in Para 8 of his affidavit, he has deposed that the Workman had voluntarily abandoned the employment and hence, the question of her termination does not arise.
39. He was cross-examined by Ld. AR for Workman at length. Though, MW-1 has taken a plea to the effect that Workman had LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 19 of 23 expressed her reluctance to work with the Management on 05.12.2020 due to Covid-19 Pandemic, however, he has admitted during his cross-examination that the Covid-19 Pandemic had started in the month of March 2020 and hence, Covid-19 patients were being admitted in the Management hospital since prior to 05.12.2020.
40. In view of the aforesaid admission on the part of MW-1, it was inquired from him as to why the Workman had never expressed her inability to work during the peak period of Covid- 19 prior to 05.12.2020. MW-1 has, accordingly, provided a plausible justification for the same by deposing that initially, during the Pandemic of Covid-19, directions were issued by the Government for reservation of 20-30% beds in the hospital for Covid-19 patient, however, in November-December 2020, Government has declared the Management hospital as a dedicated hospital for Covid-19 patients and hence, around 05.12.2020 almost 100% beds in the hospital were occupied by Covid-19 patients. He has further deposed that due to the aforesaid reason, most of the staff of the Management had stopped reporting on duty citing their inability to work due to admission of so many Covid-19 patients in the hospital and it was only after announcement of Management for additional monetary incentive and hostel facility for staff members at the hospital premises, that most of the staff returned back on duty. The aforesaid testimony of MW-1 has remained uncontroverted during his further cross-examination.
41. Further, I do not find any admission on the part of MW-1 LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 20 of 23 that the attendance record of employees of Management, including that of Workman, for the relevant period has already been destroyed. Rather, he had sought time to check the records of Management to respond whether he shall be able to produce the aforesaid record, while, alleging that most of the records of the aforesaid period has already been destroyed. Workman has, however, failed to seek any direction to Management to produce the aforesaid record for reasons best known to her.
42. No doubt, there are contradictions in various documents relied upon by the Management qua the actual period during which the Workman remained in continuous employment of Management, however, there is no dispute between the parties that Workman had never worked with Management after the first week of December, 2020. The only dispute between the parties is about the fact whether she herself abandoned her job with Management or her services were terminated by Management on 05.04.2021. It has already been observed hereinabove that Workman has failed to prove termination of her services by the Management w.e.f. 05.04.2021. On the other hand, admittedly Workman has never performed her duty with Management after 07.12.2020 and after 07.12.2020, she had allegedly first reported on her duty on 05.04.2021.
43. She has, however, not only failed to prove that she had reported on her duty at the hospital of Management on 05.04.2021, but, she has also failed to prove that she was on medical leave w.e.f. 07.12.2020 until 05.04.2021. There is no evidence led on behalf of Management to prove that her last LIR No.406/2024 Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 21 of 23 working day with Management was 05.12.2020 and not 07.12.2020 as alleged by Workman. Be that as it may, omission of Workman to prove herself to be on medical leave between 07.12.2020 and 05.04.2021 and that she had actually reported on her duty on 05.04.2021, coupled with her deposition to the effect that between 07.12.2020 and 12.12.2020, she requested the Management to recruit her daughter in her place and the fact that first dispute qua illegal termination of her services was admittedly raised by her vide demand notice dated 10.03.2022 i.e. after expiry of almost one year from the date of her alleged termination, are sufficient to probablise the defence of Management that, it was Workman, who, herself had left/abandoned the services of Management.
44. In view of the aforesaid discussion, though, Management has failed to prove that Workman had herself left/abandoned the services of Management w.e.f. any specific date such as - 05.12.2020, however, it has been able to prove, on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities, that contrary to her claim qua illegal termination of her services w.e.f 05.04.2021, she herself had left/abandoned the services of Management.
45. issue no. (i) is thus partly decided in favour of Management.
Issue no. (iii): Relief, if any.
46. In view of my findings on issues no. (i) and (ii) hereinabove, in my considered opinion, Workman is not entitled to any relief.
LIR No.406/2024Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 22 of 23
47. Present claim of Workman is thus hereby dismissed and reference dated 04.03.2024 is answered in following terms:
"Workman Smt. Baby W/o Sh. Ram Babu Mishra, has failed to prove illegal termination of her services by Management w.e.f. 05.04.2021, whereas, Management has been able to prove that she had voluntarily left/abandoned the services of Management and hence, she is not entitled to any relief"
48. Ordered accordingly.
49. Requisite number of copies of this award be sent to the competent authority for publication as per rules.
Announced in the open Court on this 31st day of October, 2025. This award consists of 23 number of signed pages.
ARUN Digitally signed by
ARUN KUMAR GARG
KUMAR Date: 2025.10.31
GARG 15:08:49 +0530
(ARUN KUMAR GARG)
Presiding Officer Labour Court-III
Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi
LIR No.406/2024
Baby Vs. M/s. Ayushman Hospital & Health Services Award dated 31.10.2025 Page 23 of 23