Delhi District Court
Labour/Ind. Tribunal Reference Matter/1094/2006 on 15 January, 2007
1
IN THE COURT OF MS. REKHA RANI : POLC - XIII :
KARKARDOOMA COURTS : SHAHDARA : DELHI
ID NO. 1094/2006
BETWEEN
MANAGEMENT OF
M/S PODDAR PRAYOGSHALA
PLOT NO. 14, PHASE - II,
IIND FLOOR, INDUSTRIAL AREA,
BADLI, DELHI - 110042.
AND
WORKMAN
SH. PINKU KUMAR, S/O SH. PARSHU RAM,
C/O SANYUKT KAMGAR MANCH (REGD),
N41A/287, J. J. CAMP, SURAJ PARK,
NEW DELHI - 42.
AWARD
1.Workman filed statement of claim under section 10(4A) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 pleading therein the following facts: He worked with the management as 'Mistri' for the last eight years. His last drawn wages were Rs.2000/ per month. He worked honestly and diligently. He never gave any cause of complaint to the management. Management did not give him legal facilities such as appointment letter, attendance card, pay slip, casual or annual leave, payment of bonus, ESI and PF facilities and minimum wages. When he demanded the same management got annoyed and terminated his services w.e.f. 16.02.2006. He has prayed for reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.
2. Management contested his claim by its written statement. It is ID NO. 1094/2006 2 denied he worked for eight years. It is stated that he was employed with the management on 22.01.2004 and that he was a habitual absentee as shown in para two of the written statement. It is denied that the management did not provide him legal facilities and when he demanded the same it got annoyed and terminated his services. It is stated that he worked in the factory of the management till 17.01.2005 and remained unauthorisedly absent w.e.f. 18.01.2005 without any sanction of leave. It is stated that he is running a grocery shop in his jhuggi and earning handsome money.
3. On the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed by my Ld predecessor vide his order dated 05.09.2005 :
1. Whether the services of the workman have been terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the management ? If so its effects.
2. Relief.
4. During the pendency of the case parties settled the matter. Workman received an amount of Rs.19,000/ (Nineteen Thousands only) in full and final settlement of his claim and stated that after receipt of the said amount he is left with no claim whatsoever against the management. The settlement deed is proved as Ex'C'. Worker stated that it is signed by him on each page at point 'A' and counter signed by his AR at point 'B' on page two. He further stated that he signed receipt Ex'C1' at point 'A1' and counter ID NO. 1094/2006 3 signed by his AR at point 'B1'.
5. In view of the statement of the worker claim is disposed aas having been settled amicably. Appropriate government be informed accordingly. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open PRESIDING OFFICER
Court today. LABOUR COURT NO. XIII
DATE : 15.01.2007 KARKARDOOMA COURTS
DELHI
ID NO. 1094/2006