Delhi High Court - Orders
Rakcon Contract Karmchari Union vs Mrs Sunita Patney Principal Rajkumari ... on 1 June, 2021
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:DINESH
SINGH NAYAL
Signing Date:01.06.2021
18:45:13
$~6 & 7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021
RAKCON CONTRACT KARMCHARI UNION ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gunjan Singh and Ms. Ankita
Wilson, Advocates.
versus
MRS SUNITA PATNEY PRINCIPAL RAJKUMARI AMRIT
KAUR COLLEGE OF NURSING ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for
College (M: 921113560,
9654169406) with Dr. Daisy Thomas,
Vice Principal in person.
Mr. Ashwini K. Sakhuja, Mr. Puneet
Saini, Advocates for R-2 with Mr.
Anil Gulia, Partner M/s Competent
Services Regd (M: 8810633505,
98100222136).
7 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 1734/2021 and CM APPLs. 5007/2021, 5008/2021,
13174/2021
RAKCON CONTRACT KARMCHARI UNION ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gunjan Singh and Ms. Ankita
Wilson, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocate for UOI
(M: 921113560, 9654169406) with
Dr. Daisy Thomas, Vice Principal in
person.
Mr. Ashwini K. Sakhuja, Mr. Puneet
Saini, Advocates for R-4 with Mr.
Anil Gulia, Partner M/s Competent
Services Regd (M: 8810633505,
98100222136).
CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021 & W.P.(C) 1734/2021 Page 1 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:DINESH
SINGH NAYAL
Signing Date:01.06.2021
18:45:13
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 01.06.2021
1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing. CONT. CAS (C) 238/2021
2. The present contempt petition has been filed seeking implementation of order dated 9th February, 2021 passed in W.P.(C) 1734/2021. Vide the said order, directions were passed in respect of 39 workmen, who are part of the Petitioner-Union, restraining Respondent No.2 i.e., the Rajkumari Amrit Kaur College of Nursing, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter, "College") from taking coercive measures against them, by way of dis-engagement. The operative portion of order dated 9th February, 2021 reads as under:
"18. It is made clear that no coercive measures, by way of their disengagement, or otherwise, will be taken by respondent no. 2-college against the 39 workmen, who are the members of the petitioner-union, and whose names are mentioned in paragraph 7 of the writ petition, till further orders of the Court."
3. Mr. Gunjan Singh, ld. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner-Union submits that despite this order, the College has not engaged the Petitioners. It is submitted that the Petitioners have already been terminated and they are not being provided employment by the College. Ld. counsel submits that the Petitioners were sitting on dharna outside the hospital for a long period of time as, despite repeatedly approaching the new contractor, they were not being provided employment.
4. Ld. counsel further submits that the entire purpose appears to be to CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021 & W.P.(C) 1734/2021 Page 2 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:01.06.2021 18:45:13 engage new employees. Reliance is placed by him on various orders passed in W.P.(C) 4834/2020 titled All India General Kamgar Union v. UOI & Ors. and W.P.(C) 5697/2020 titled Niti Tyagi & Ors. v. UOI & Ors. involving the same contractor wherein a similar situation has arisen. He also relies upon the inquiry which was directed by this Court in W.P.(C) 4834/2020 titled All India General Kamgar Union v. UOI & Ors., in which the Contractor's malpractices were revealed.
5. Ms. Anju Gupta, ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 - College, along with Dr. Daisy Thomas, Vice-Principal of the College, submit that the tender was awarded through the Government e-Marketplace portal ("GEM portal"). Those of the workers who were found eligible were taken into service. The remaining workers, who belong to the Petitioner- union, are not eligible and hence, they were not taken into service. Today, on a specific query put to Dr. Daisy Thomas, the stand taken is that the College had told the contractor, after passing of order dated 9th February, 2021 to re-engage the workers.
6. Mr. Ashwini Sakhuja, ld. Counsel appearing for the Contractor i.e., Respondent No.4 submits that this entire litigation is a proxy litigation by the earlier contractor, Jai Balaji Security Services, who had engaged the Petitioners herein. Ld. counsel submits that the process through which the tender was awarded to M/s Competent Services was a transparent process using the GEM portal, which is managed by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of India. He submits that paragraph 11 of order dated 9th February, 2021 makes it clear that he had submitted that 20 workers had been taken into service and 60 workers had already been deployed and there was no further space to deploy more workers. Under such circumstances, the CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021 & W.P.(C) 1734/2021 Page 3 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:01.06.2021 18:45:13 Court had passed a status quo order in paragraph 13. According to Mr. Sakhuja, ld. Counsel, therefore, the obligation is on the College and no prayer has been sought against M/s. Competent Services as no order was passed against M/s. Competent Services. He further submits that it would not be possible to absorb these workmen, inasmuch as currently, there is no vacancy. Relying on the sur-rejoinder filed by the College it is argued that the college admits that the names of the workmen were not given to the Contractor.
7. Mr. Anil Gulia, Director, M/s Competent Services has joined the proceedings today. On a query put to him, he submits that he is currently providing workers/contractual employees in various establishments, including the Maulana Azad Medical College, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi; Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya Hospital, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi; Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, Delhi; Shri Dadab Dev Mother and Child Hospital, Janakpuri, Delhi; Rao Tularam Memorial Hospital, Jaffarpur, New Delhi; dispensaries in Rohini and in other establishments such as PWD, CPWD and DDA. He submits that those of the workmen who approached him and who were found eligible were employed.
8. Heard ld. counsel for the parties in the contempt petition. Certain pleadings have been shown to the Court both in the writ petition as also the contempt petition. The additional counter affidavit filed in the contempt petition has placed on record various emails wherein the College, as also the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, have agreed and taken a decision that the interim order dated 9th February, 2021 has to be complied with in letter and spirit.
9. The order dated 9th February, 2021 does not brook any ambiguity CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021 & W.P.(C) 1734/2021 Page 4 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:01.06.2021 18:45:13 whatsoever. The Respondent No.2-College cannot disengage the Petitioners while the order is in operation. The stand of the Vice Principal today is that M/s. Competent Services is bound to engage the Petitioners. It is made clear that this Court is not concerned with the internal arrangement between the College and the Contractor at this point. The order dated 9 th February, 2021 is clearly in operation and all concerned have to ensure that there is complete compliance of the said order. The order clearly directs the Respondent No.2-College not to disengage the Petitioners. Accordingly, it is directed that the Petitioners shall be re-engaged by the Respondent No.2- College, within a period of one week, failing which, notice of contempt would be bound to be issued on the next date both against the college authorities as also the Contractor. The Contractor i.e., Respondent No.4 shall cooperate with the College for giving effect to this order.
10. List on 27th July, 2021.
W.P.(C) 1734/2021 & CM APPLs.5007-08/2021, 13174/2021
11. List on 27th July, 2021 along with W.P.(C) 4834/2020 titled All India General Kamgar Union v. UOI & Ors.
12. Let all the pleadings be brought on record by the respective parties before the next date of hearing.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
JUNE 1, 2021/dk/T CONT.CAS(C) 238/2021 & W.P.(C) 1734/2021 Page 5 of 5