Delhi District Court
Sh. Sunil Kumar vs M/S Dcm Boys Sr. Sec. School on 4 June, 2010
BEFORE THE COURT OF SH A.S. JAYACHANDRA
PO : LABOUR COURT : KKD : DELHI
DID No. 313/08
Unique ID No. 02402C0849562008
IN THE MATTER OF : -
Sh. Sunil Kumar
S/o Sh. Suraj Bhan
C/o Rajdhani General Majdoor Ekta Union
Goshala Gate, Kishan Ganj
Delhi-110006 ...........Workman
versus
M/s DCM Boys Sr. Sec. School
(Govt. Affiliated / Aided School)
Kishan Ganj, Delhi-110006 ..........Management
DATE OF FILING : 06.12.2008
FINAL ORDER MADE ON : 04.06.2010
AWARD
1.This is a direct dispute filed by the workman. Workman contends that he was working with the management as a sweeper since 13.07.1998 and his last drawn salary was Rs. 1,000/- per month. Workman was removed and another person was appointed on his place. The date of removal is not mentioned. He further states that on 01.08.2008, he was denied the job and was intimated so. He pleads that he was victimised, discriminated, illegally terminated without any DID No. 313/08 1/3 memo of charges and the termination according to the workman is oppose to Section 25-F, G and H of the ID Act. Hence, he prays for reinstatement along with full back wages.
2. Notice ordered to the management. Management in its WS contended that it is a government school and this court has no jurisdiction as per Delhi School Education Act. Management contended that the claimant was never appointed and there is no question of termination. Claimant is a full time employee of gaushala, Kishan Ganj, Delhi. Management also states that there is no permanent vacancy of sweeper in the school. Management contends that workman has not completed 240 days of service. It submits that the claim be dismissed.
3. Based on the pleadings on 18.09.2009, I have framed the following four issues :
a) Whether the workman proves that he was a part time sweeper with the management since 13.07.1998, till 01.08.2008 ?
b) Whether the workman proves that he was prevented from discharging the duties w.e.f. 01.08.2008, amount into illegal termination ?
c) Whether the management proves that there is no cause of action ?
d) Relief.
DID No. 313/08 2/3
4. Workman has not led any evidence to prove the issues.
Management has also not led any evidence. For the lack of evidence on the part of the workman, I am unable to answer the issues in favour of the workman. Hence, I pass the following :-
AWARD The direct dispute filed by the workman stands dismissed for want of evidence. File be consigned to RR. Dated: 4th June, 2010 (A.S. JAYACHANDRA) POLC/KKD/DELHI/XVII DID No. 313/08 3/3