Peoples Union For Democratic ... vs Union Of India And Others
2011 Latest Caselaw 297 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 524/2010

PEOPLES UNION FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS & OTHERS..
                                             ...Petitioners
                    Through Mr.Colin Gonsalves, Sr.Advocate
                            with Mr.Tariq Adeeb, Adv.
             versus

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS                               ..... Respondents
                  Through              Mr.Sanjeev Sachdeva with
                                       Mr.VibhuVerma, Advs. R-1, 5 and
                                       6.
                                       Ms. Noopur Singhal, Adv.
                                       Mr.Ajay Verma, Adv. R-DDA
                                       Mr.Rahul Srivastava with
                                       Mr.Anshum Jain, Advs. R-MCD
                                       Mr.Anil Amrit, Adv. R-7
                                       Mr.Atul Sharma with Mr.Abhishek
                                       Sharma, Advs. R-11/DIAL
                                       Mr.K.C. Kaushik with Mr.Rahul
                                       Kaushik, Advs. R-12
                                       Ms.Asha Menon, Member
                                       Secretary with Mr.Harish Dudani,
                                       OSD, DLSA
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
             ORDER

% 19.01.2011

This Court on earlier occasion had issued series of directions. In

course of hearing today a submission was made by Mr.Colin Gonsalves,

learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the amount collected by the

principal employers has not yet been deposited with the Board.

2. Mr. K.C. Kaushik, learned counsel for the DMRC submitted that a

sum of Rs.1,26,47,00,000/- has already been deposited with the Board.

Whether the aforesaid amount is the full amount or something remains to

be deposited, shall be clarified by the next date of hearing by filing an

affidavit. It is submitted by Mr. Atul Sharma, learned counsel for DIAL

that a sum of Rs.31,90,00,000/- has been deposited with the Board and a

further sum of Rs. 17,00,00,000/- shall be deposited on or before 30th

March, 2011. Be it noted, though such a statement has been made but no

affidavit has been filed. Let an affidavit be filed in that regard within two

weeks hence. As far as other principal employers are concerned, oral

statements have been made. It has been submitted that the cess amount

has been deposited. The same has not been quantified. Let an appropriate

affidavit quantifying the amount be filed within two weeks hence.

3. At this juncture, it is apt to note that on many an occasion this

Court had directed the principal employers to verify the names of the

employees engaged by the contractors, who were awarded contract by

them and furnish the names of the workers to the Union of India,

GNCTD and the Board. Be it noted, some of the principal employers are

DIAL, MCD, DMRC, DDA, CPWD, NDMC and PWD.

4. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, learned counsel for the Union of India

submitted that 42 contractors working under various principal employers

have not yet submitted the details to the principal employers. It is also

urged by him that though in some cases the names have been supplied

but no address has been given. Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned senior

counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that in the affidavit filed by the

MCD, in some cases only the name of the employee is given without any

address and parentage. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that all the

principal employers shall provide the address of the employees engaged

by the contractors to the authorities, namely, Union of India, GNCTD

and the Board constituted under the Building and Other Construction

Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Services) Act

1996 (for short, 1996 Act). Till the names of the workers are not

supplied, any amount that is due to the contractors shall not be paid by

the principal employers, failing which the authority paying the amount

shall be liable for contempt of this Court. A statement in this regard be

filed before this Court. The information, which has been directed to be

supplied, shall be in accordance with the Delhi Building and Other

Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of

Services) Rules 2002 (for short, Rules 2002). Needless to say, the forms

appended to the Rules 2002 has to be treated as a part of the Rules.

5. If any contractor has violated the Act and the Rules, the competent

authority under the Act shall launch prosecution against them. The

statutory authority, which has been conferred power to do so, must act in

quite promptitude.

6. This Court on earlier occasion had directed the Labour

Commissioner to act in a pro-active manner. We have been apprised by

Mr. Waziri, learned Standing Counsel for the GNCTD that the Labour

Commissioner is the Secretary of the Board. While he is functioning in a

dual capacity, the responsibility is accentuated and hence, it is incumbent

on him to do the needful. As we require the assistance of the Labour

Commissioner, who is the Secretary of the Board, he shall remain

personally present on the next date of hearing.

7. It will be appropriate to note as submitted by Mr. Waziri, learned

Standing Counsel for the GNCTD and also by learned counsel for the

Board that approximately 42000 employees have been registered. Mr.

Gonsalves, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

registration is not good enough inasmuch as no benefits as enshrined

under the Rules have been made available to the workers.

8. The real issue that has been disturbing this Court is how to make

the benefits under the Rules, 2002 and the schemes, namely, the financial

assistance for education, financial assistance for marriage, family

pension, recovery of advances and loans, refund of contribution of

deceased member, benefits under the LIC policy, maternity benefit etc.

reach and availed of by the workmen. We have been apprised by Mr.

Gonsalves, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, who is assisted by

Mr. Subhash Bhatnagar, that hardly 1200 workmen have received the

benefit. Mr. Amjad Hassan, who represents another union, submitted that

workmen who have been registered with them, only 700 have received

the benefit. Mr. Waziri, learned Standing Counsel for the GNCTD

submitted that about 5000 children of the registered workmen are being

given the benefits available under the scheme. The figure as we perceive

is far from being satisfactory. Regard being had to the factum of

registration so far made, a number of workers are still deserve to be

registered. At this juncture, Mr. Gonsalves, learned senior counsel for

the petitioners after taking instructions from Mr. Subhash Bhatnagar,

submitted that 13,000 applications are pending with the Board. Without

getting into this aspect, at this juncture, we would like the Board to

devise a rational, logical and acceptable scheme to reach out to the

workers. Awareness drive has to be launched. For the purpose of

explaining benefits, a holistic scheme shall be filed before this Court

within two weeks hence. Certain suggestions have been prepared by Mr.

Colin Gonsalves, learned senior counsel which have been handed over to

Mr. Waziri, learned Standing Counsel for the GNCTD. The Board shall

take the same into consideration as the moto of everyone is to see that the

registered workers get the benefit.

9. The next aspect that we shall advert to is about the compensation

that was supposed to be given to the persons, who have met with

accidents. An affidavit has been filed by the DLC that 45 persons have

been granted compensation. Let a further affidavit be filed, on the basis

of the material placed on record, explaining why other beneficiaries have

been excluded. We say so as we have been apprised by Mr. Gonsalves

that there were 140 deaths and their representatives are entitled to get

compensation.

10. At this stage, Mr. Amjad Hassan has submitted that 27 workers

were injured but additional sum of Rs.25,000/- has not been paid to the

11 workers. It is submitted by him that this amount is payable and

demand drafts are kept ready in the office of the Deputy Labour

Commissioner, South. It is further submitted by him that 3 workers are

not in a position to collect the drafts because of injuries suffered by them.

Rest 8 workers shall collect demand drafts within two weeks from today.

The 3 workers shall be given drafts through Mr. Amjad Hassan, with

appropriate instructions by the competent authority, namely, Deputy

Labour Commissioner so that the said money cannot be transferred to

any other person except to the workmen. Needless to say, the aforesaid

amount that has been paid or which shall be paid has nothing to do with

the claim advanced under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923.

11. Let the matter be listed on 9th February, 2011. On that date, Labour

Commissioner-Secretary of the Board, Secretary DDA, Commissioner

MCD, General Manager HR DAIL, Secretary NDMC and the Chief

Labour Commissioner, Union of India shall remain personally present in

the Court failing which they shall be visited with grave consequences. It

is hereby made clear that no application for exemption from personal

appearance shall be entertained. We hope and trust that the said

authorities shall not go out of the country without prior leave of this

Court unless there is real emergency and exigency.

Order dasti under signature of the Court Master.

                                             CHIEF JUSTICE



JANUARY 19, 2011                             SANJIV KHANNA, J.
NA