Arun Kumar Chaturvedi vs The Management Of M/S Punja ...
2010 Latest Caselaw 1209 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                     W.P.(C) No. 805/2008

%                                       Judgment delivered on: 03.03.2010

Arun Kumar Chaturvedi.                                     ........Petitioner.
                                         Through: Mr.K.P. Singh, Advocate
                      versus

The Management of M/s Punja Distributors (p) Ltd.
                                               ..... Respondent
                             Through:

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR

1.     Whether the Reporters of local papers may
       be allowed to see the judgment?                                       Yes

2.     To be referred to Reporter or not?                                    Yes

3.     Whether the judgment should be reported
       in the Digest?                                                        Yes

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. Oral:
*

1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the

impugned award dated 27.07.2006 whereby the Ld. Labour Court

while answering the reference in favour of the petitioner workman

has granted an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation.

2. Brief facts as set out by the petitioner relevant for

deciding the present petition are that the petitioner workman

joined the respondent management as an Assistant Accountant in

1993 on a monthly salary of Rs.1700/- and when he demanded

legal facilities such as salary on the basis of the Minimum Wages

Act, double over time bonus etc. the respondent management got

annoyed and his services were terminated on 22.01.1998. It is

alleged by the petitioner workman that the respondent

management called the petitioner to its premises on 9.2.1998 on

the pretence of finalizing the accounts and under the threat of

some goonda elements obtained his signatures on various blank

vouchers, blank papers, registers etc. Thereafter, a demand

notice dated 10.02.1998 was sent by the petitioner to the

respondent management and the petitioner raised an Industrial

Dispute before the Labour Court and an ex-parte award was

passed on 17.7.2000 where the petitioner was granted full back

wages and continuity of service. On filing of application by the

respondent management, the ex-parte award was set aside vide

order dated 15.12.2001 and further after the claim was contested

by the management, the labour court vide order dated 27.7.2006

answered the reference in favour of the petitioner and granted

retrenchment compensation of Rs.20,000/- in lieu of back wages,

continuity of services and all other benefits. Feeling aggrieved

with the meagre amount of compensation the petitioner has

preferred the present petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was working with the respondent management on the post of

Assistant Accountant-cum-General Worker since January, 1993

on a monthly salary of Rs.1700/- and his services were illegally

terminated by the respondent management when he was not

allowed to join his duties on 22.01.1998. Counsel for the

petitioner further submits that the ld. Labour Court did not accept

the defence taken by the respondent management that the

petitioner had himself abandoned the said job. Counsel for the

petitioner also submits that the petitioner workman successfully

proved before the Labour Court that his services were illegally

terminated by the respondent management and that once the

Labour Court found that the termination of the petitioner was

illegal then normally his reinstatement with full back wages should

have been allowed but instead the Ld. Labour Court granted a

meagre amount of Rs.20,000/- that too without any basis.

Counsel further submits that even the minimum wages for the said

job of the petitioner is much more and if such wages are taken into

consideration, the compensation amount would be much higher

than the amount granted by the Ld. Labour Court.

4. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner.

5. The petitioner was taken in the employment of the

respondent on the post of an Assistant Accountant cum General

Worker in the year 1993 and he remained in service for almost a

period of five years when he was illegally terminated from his job.

Even as per the case proved on record, the petitioner was drawing

a salary of Rs.1700/- per month and even if the said salary is

taken into consideration than the award of Rs.20,000/- as

compensation is nowhere near to the grant of amount of full back

wages. Ordinarily, this court would not have interfered in the

discretionary powers exercised by the ld. Labour Court while

awarding the compensation of Rs.20,000/- in favour of the

petitioner workman but since no basis has been given by the Ld.

Labour Court in arriving at the said figure of Rs.20,000/- and also

the fact that the said compensation amount is much on the lower

side, therefore I am of the view that the interest of justice in the

given facts of the case would be best served if the said

compensation of Rs.20,000/- is enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/-. The full

back wages even if calculated @ Rs.1700/- per month from the

date of the termination till the date of the impugned award would

come to Rs.1,73,400/- and therefore, I feel that the grant of

compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the petitioner would

serve the ends of justice.

6. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned

award is modified to the limited extent of enhancing the

compensation amount of Rs.20,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. Let the

said amount of compensation be paid by the respondent within a

period of one month from the date of this order failing which the

respondent shall be liable to pay the said amount of compensation

with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order till the

final realization of the amount.

March 03, 2010                           KAILASH GAMBHIR,J
pkv