Delhi District Court
Dinesh Singh vs M/S Pal Facility Management Services ... on 3 January, 2026
IN THE COURT OF SH. ARUN KUMAR GARG
PRESIDING OFFICER : LABOUR COURT-III
ROUSE AVENUE COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI.
CNR No. DLCT13-004740-2025
Ref. No. F.25(140)/R-51/SWD/Lab./211 dated 23.07.2025
LIR No. 621/2025
Sh. Dinesh Singh S/o Sh. Raghunandan
Mobile No. 7210942209
R/o B-145, Madanpur Khadar, Sarita Vihar,
Delhi-110076.
Through:
Sh. Nagender Pal Singh (AR),
Delhi Karamchari Sangh (Regd.1789),
W-4, Opposite Kalkaji Bus Depot,
Govindpuri, New Delhi-110019
Also through:
Sh. Ajit Kumar Singh, AR/Advocate of Workman,
Chamber No. B-61, BGS Block,
Tis Hazari Court, Delhi-110054
Mobile No. 9811619336
Email - [email protected] ..... Workman
VERSUS
M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.,
E-568, Street No.-79, Mahavir Enclave, Part-3,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059 ..... Management
Date of Institution of the case : 30.07.2025
Date on which Award is passed : 03.01.2026
AWARD:
1.By this award, I will dispose off the present claim filed by Workman pursuant to reference under Section 10(1)(C) & 12(5) of Industrial Disputes Act, received from the office of Deputy LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 1 of 10Labour Commissioner (South-West), Labour Department, Govt.
of NCT of Delhi vide order reference no.
F.25(140)/R-51/SWD/Lab./211 dated 23.07.2025, whereby, the following issue has been referred to this Court for adjudication:-
"Whether the services of Workman Sh. Dinesh Singh S/o Sh. Raghunandan, aged - 39 Years, Mobile No. 7210942209 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?"
2. The aforesaid reference was received by this Court on 30.07.2025 and the statement of claim was thereafter filed by Workman on 15.09.2025. Brief case of Workman as per his statement of claim is that Workman was working with Management on the post of Washing Boy/Operation Executive since 12.08.2021, however, Management has not issued any appointment letter in the name of Workman, nor, has the Management provided any legal facilities to him, such as- pay slip, HRA, casual leave, bonus and over-time wages despite taking work from him for a period of 12 hours per day.
3. On 05.01.2024, according to him, his services were illegally terminated by Management without any prior notice, notice pay/service compensation in violation of provisions of Section 25F and G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Management, according to him, has failed to reinstate him into the job despite receipt of demand notice dated 26.02.2024 and despite his complaint/claim before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Hari Nagar, New Delhi. It is further his case that he is wholly unemployed since the date of illegal termination of his services LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 2 of 10by Management, in as much as, he could not get any alternative employment despite search at several places. Workman has thus prayed for his reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of service and other consequential benefits.
4. Notice of statement of claim was thereafter issued to Management, however, Management refused to accept the aforesaid notice on more than one occasion i.e. on 18.09.2025, 23.09.2025 and 24.09.2025, leading to service of aforesaid notice upon Management by way of affixation on 24.09.2025. Management was thereafter declared, vide order dated 29.10.2025, to be duly served with the notice of statement of claim on 24.09.2025. Management has, however, neither appeared before the Court, nor, filed any Written Statement to the claim of Workman within the stipulated period. Right of Management to file written statement was thus closed and Management was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.10.2025.
5. On an application of Management, Ex-parte order dated 29.10.2025 against the Management was subsequently recalled vide order dated 27.11.2025, subject to cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by Management to Workman, making the payment of the aforesaid cost a pre-condition for further participation of Management in the present proceedings. Subject to payment of the aforesaid cost by Management to Workman on 11.12.2025, Management was granted one week's time to file its written statement to the claim of Workman along with all relevant documents in its possession. Management has, however, neither paid the aforesaid cost to Workman, nor, has it filed any written LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 3 of 10statement to the claim of Workman despite opportunity. Order dated 29.10.2025 of this Court, closing the right of Management to file its written statement to the claim of Workman, was thus once again restored vide order dated 11.12.2025.
6. Workman has thereafter examined himself as WW-1 i.e. as the sole witness in support of his case and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.WW1/A along with following documents:
(i) Ex.WW1/1: Office copy of complaint dated 19.04.2024 of Workman addressed to Assistant Labour Commissioner.
(ii) Ex.WW1/2: Report dated 24.09.2024 of Labour Inspector.
(iii) Ex.WW1/3: Office copy of demand notice dated 26.02.2024 of Workman.
(iv) Ex.WW1/4: Original postal receipt regarding dispatch of demand notice dated 26.02.2024 to Management.
(v) Ex.WW1/5: Office copy of statement of claim filed by Workman before Conciliation Officer.
(vi) Ex.WW1/6: Copy of identity card of Workman issued by Management.
(vii) Ex.WW1/7: Copy of ESI card of Workman.
(viii) Ex.WW1/8: Copy of bank statement of Workman with PNB, Apollo Hospital, Delhi branch.
7. WW-1 was not cross-examined by Management despite opportunity. In fact, on the date fixed for evidence of Workman, Management had failed to appear despite repeated calls. Workman was accordingly discharged without cross-examination after the Management was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 17.12.2025. No other witness was examined on behalf of LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 4 of 10Workman despite opportunity and hence, on the submission of Ld. AR of Workman, Workman's evidence was closed vide order dated 17.12.2025.
8. Considering the fact that Management had already been proceeded ex-parte and no written statement had ever been filed by Management despite repeated opportunities, matter was thereafter adjourned for ex-parte final arguments. Ex-parte final arguments on behalf of Workman have thereafter been heard today in the morning.
9. It is submitted by Ld. AR for Workman that in the absence of any written statement of Management, all the averments made by Workman in his statement of claim shall be deemed to have been duly admitted by Management. Even otherwise, according to him, Workman has been able to prove all the averments made by him in his statement of claim by way of his uncontroverted testimony in the form of affidavit Ex. WW1/A, which, is duly corroborated by the documents tendered by him in his evidence. He submits that the Workman has been able to prove existence of employer-employee relationship between the parties to present claim w.e.f. 12.08.2021 through the documents Ex. WW1/6 to Ex. WW1/8 and illegal termination of his services by the Management w.e.f. 05.01.2024 by way of his uncontroverted testimony. He submits that despite categorical deposition of Workman, qua his complete unemployment since the date of illegal termination of his services by Management, Management has failed to lead any evidence to prove that the Workman had remained gainfully employed at any point of time since the date of illegal termination of his services by Management. He has thus LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 5 of 10prayed for an award in favour of Workman in terms of prayer made by him in his statement of claim.
10. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of Workman and have carefully perused the material available on record.
11. As has already been observed herein above, Workman has alleged himself to be in employment of Management as a Washing Boy/Operations Executive since 12.08.2021, against last drawn monthly wages of Rs. 20,000/-, and illegal termination of his services by Management w.e.f. 05.01.2024. Despite receipt of notice of statement of claim, Management has failed to appear and to file any written statement to the claim of Workman leading to an ex-parte order dated 29.10.2025 against the Management. Even after the order dated 29.10.2025 against Management was recalled by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025, subject to cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by Management to Workman, while, giving one more opportunity to Management to file its written statement to the claim of Workman, Management has failed to avail the aforesaid opportunity, in as much as, neither the cost in terms of order dated 27.11.2025 was paid to Workman, nor, any written statement to the claim of Workman was filed by Management.
12. In fact, since 17.12.2025, Management has even stopped appearing in the matter. Under the aforesaid circumstances, all the averments made by Workman in his statement of claim are deemed to have been admitted by Management. Even otherwise, Workman has examined himself as WW-1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A in his evidence along with documents LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 6 of 10Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/8. In his affidavit, he has once again re- affirmed, on oath, all the averments made by him in his statement of claim. The aforesaid testimony of Workman, by way of affidavit Ex. WW-1/A, has remained uncontroverted, in as much as, he was not cross-examined by Management despite opportunity.
13. In any case, the aforesaid testimony of Workman is duly corroborated by the documents tendered by him in his evidence. A bare perusal of record reveals that the documents, tendered by him in his evidence, include a demand notice dated 26.02.2024, served by him upon Management through speed post, prior to filing of present claim, challenging illegal termination of his services by Management on 05.01.2024 and seeking his reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of service and other consequential benefits. It is deposed by Workman that even the said demand notice was never responded to by Management giving rise to an implied admission on the part of Management of all the averments made in the said demand notice.
14. Workman has tendered another document Ex.WW1/2 in his evidence, which is a report of the Labour Inspector appointed under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Delhi Shops And Establishments Act, 1954. It is recorded by the Labour Inspector in her report dated 21.09.2024 (Ex. WW-1/2) that Management had not only failed to produce the statutory record before the Labour Inspector despite repeated notices and opportunities, but, had also categorically refused to reinstate the Workman into his job.
LIR No. 621/2025Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 7 of 1015. Another document, tendered by Workman in his evidence, is a copy of his identity card Ex.WW1/6 issued by Management in his name, wherein, date of his joining the Management is clearly mentioned as 12.08.2021. No doubt, in his ESI card Ex.WW1/7, issued at the instance of Management, date of his appointment with Management is mentioned as 05.03.2023, however, I find force in the submission of Ld. AR of Workman that the same merely corroborates the stand of Workman that Management had not been providing him with various statutory facilities during his employment, in as much as, even the ESI facility was provided to him much after the date of his joining the Management.
16. Under the aforesaid circumstances, in my considered opinion, there are no justifiable reasons for this Court to disbelieve the uncontroverted testimony of Workman not only qua existence of employer-employee relationship between the parties to the present claim, but, also qua illegal termination of his services by the Management w.e.f. 05.01.2024. Workman, in my considered opinion, has thus been able to prove on record, through his uncontroverted testimony in the form of affidavit Ex. WW-1/A, that his services were illegally terminated by Management on 05.01.2024 without any advance notice, notice pay or service compensation in violation of provisions of Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, after he had continuously worked with Management for a period of over two years as a Washing Boy/Operations Executive since 12.08.2021 against last drawn monthly wages of Rs. 20,000/-.
17. Even the testimony of Workman, that he is completely unemployed since the date of termination of his services by LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.
Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 8 of 10Management, has remained uncontroverted and Management has failed to lead any evidence to prove that Workman had remained gainfully employed at any point of time after illegal termination of his services by Management. Under the aforesaid circumstances, considering the fact that Workman had promptly raised the industrial dispute qua illegal termination of his services vide demand notice dated 26.02.2024 and approached the labour department with his grievance, in my considered opinion, he is entitled to his reinstatement with full back wages w.e.f. the date of termination of his services till the date of this award, continuity of service and other consequential benefits.
18. The claim of Workman, qua illegal termination of his services by Management, is thus disposed of with a direction to Management to reinstate him in his job with continuity of service and other consequential benefits and to pay 100% back wages to him from the date of termination of his services i.e. w.e.f. 05.01.2024 until the date of this reinstatement, to be calculated at the rate of wages lastly drawn by the Workman as on the date of termination of his services by the Management i.e. @ Rs. 20,000/- per month, within a period of 15 days from the date of publication of this award, failing which, Management shall pay the Award amount to the Workman along with simple interest @9% per annum from the date of this Award till the date of actual payment of the Award amount. Besides, the Workman shall be entitled to get the Award qua his reinstatement executed as per law.
19. Reference dated 23.07.2025 is thus answered in favour of Workman in following terms:
LIR No. 621/2025Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 9 of 10
"Workman Sh. Dinesh Singh S/o Sh. Raghunandan has been able to prove that his services were illegally terminated by Management M/s Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd. On 05.01.2024 and hence he is entitled to his reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of service and other consequential benefits. Management is thus directed to reinstate him in his job with continuity of service and other consequential benefits and to pay 100% back wages to him from the date of termination of his services i.e. w.e.f. 05.01.2024 until the date of this reinstatement, to be calculated at the rate of wages lastly drawn by the Workman as on the date of termination of his services by the Management i.e. @ Rs. 20,000/- per month, within a period of 15 days from the date of publication of this award, failing which, Management shall pay the Award amount to the Workman along with simple interest @9% per annum from the date of this Award till the date of actual payment of the Award amount. Besides, the Workman shall be entitled to get the Award qua his reinstatement executed as per law. "
20. Ordered accordingly.
21. 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 03rd day of January, 2026.
Digitally signedThis award consists of 10 number of signed pages. ARUN by ARUN KUMAR GARG KUMAR Date:
2026.01.03 GARG 12:58:08 +0530 (ARUN KUMAR GARG) Presiding Officer Labour Court-III Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi LIR No. 621/2025 Dinesh Singh Vs. M/s. Pal Facility Management Services Pvt. Ltd.Award dated 03.01.2026 Page 10 of 10