Delhi High Court
Management Of Sunder Lal Jain Hospital vs Govt. Of N.C.T.Of Delhi & Ors on 5 April, 2011
Author: Rekha Sharma
Bench: Rekha Sharma
UNREPORTABLE
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
WP (C) No.7989/2007
Date of Decision: April 05, 2011
MANAGEMENT OF SUNDER LAL JAIN HOSPITAL ..... Petitioner
through Mr. A K Singhla, Sr. Advocate
with Mr. J K Sharma, Advocate
versus
GOVT. OF N.C.T.OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
through None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA
1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the judgment? No
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the 'Digest'? No
REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
The subject matter of the present writ-petition is an order dated May 22, 2007 passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, North & North-West District, declaring respondent No.4 a 'protected workman' under the provisions of Section 33(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and under Rule 61 (4) of the Industrial Dispute (Central) Rule, 1957 for the year 1999-2000.
Much prior to the passing of the aforesaid order, respondent No.4 was dismissed from service on April 16, 1999. The dismissal WP (C) No.7989/2007 Page 1 order passed against him was set-aside by the Labour Court but in lieu of reinstatement, he was granted compensation of ` 3 lacs. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Labour Court in not granting him the relief of reinstatement, he filed a writ-petition in this Court which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge vide order dated March 30, 2009. Not satisfied, the workman filed a Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench but that too was dismissed.
Having regard to the fact that after the passing of the order declaring respondent No.4 a 'protected workman', no order of reinstatement was passed in his favour and he was only held entitled to a sum of ` 3 lacs, I am of the view that the present writ-petition has been virtually rendered infructuous. Accordingly, it is dismissed as such.
It is submitted that the petitioner has also alleged that respondent No.3, namely, Sunder Lal Jain Hospital Karamchari Union has no connection with the petitioner. Since the main relief sought in the writ petition is with regard to the order dated May 22, 2007, I am passing no order on whether the aforesaid Union has any connection with the petitioner.
For the fore-going reasons, the writ-petition is dismissed.
REKHA SHARMA, J.
APRIL 05, 2011 PC WP (C) No.7989/2007 Page 2