Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Shyam Lal & Ors.
1994 Latest Caselaw 530 Del

JUDGMENT

Jaspal Singh, J.

1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi feeling aggrieved by the award of the Presenting Officer, Labour Court, dated 17 October 1983, has filed this writ petition. The learned Presiding Officer by his impugned order came to the conclusion that the service of the respondent was terminated in an unlawful manner and directed the Municipal Corporation to reinstate him and pay back-wages from the date of termination at the minimum rate in the scale of regular employees with dearness allowance but without any increment.

2. The learned Presiding Officer found, as a matter of fact, that the respondent had worked with the petitioner from 11 April 1986 to 4 June 1986 as a daily wager. He also found that the Municipal Corporation had prepared a seniority list with regard to the daily wagers working in different hospitals run by it and that while the persons engaged as daily wagers after the respondent had been retained his service stood terminated. As already noticed above the learned Presiding Officer came to the conclusion that this was not justified.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that since the respondent had not worked for 240 days continuously no benefit could be allowed to him and that in this respect my attention was drawn to S. 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, I feel that I need not detain myself long as this since the matter is covered by two judgments of this Court, namely, Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Prabhati Ram and Others [Civil Writ No. 1145 of 1988] decided by Hon'ble Justice Sri S. B. Wad, on 29 March 1989], and Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Khacheru 1993 I CLR 357. In any case since there is finding of fact to that effect that the persons junior to the respondent and engaged as daily wagers had been retained and since that finding has not been assailed I feel that the petitioner Corporation was not justified in terminating the service of the respondent as it is an accepted principle of industrial law that in ordering retrenchment, the management should commence with the latest recruit and progressively retrench employees higher up in the list of seniority.

4. I may hasten to add that it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order suffers from illegality inasmuch as the respondent had been engaged as a daily wager in a particular hospital and as far as that hospital is concerned no daily wager had joined subsequent to him nor been retained. I feel that this argument too has no force as a joint list of seniority of the daily wagers was maintained by Municipal Corporation of Delhi with respect to different hospitals. The respondent being the employee of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and not a particular hospital the joint seniority list so prepared has to be looked into. This being the position I find no fault with the impugned order. The writ petition is dismissed but with no order as to costs.