Delhi High Court
Kamla Devi vs Jeet Singh & Anr on 19 April, 2022
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO 78/2018
Date of Decision 19/04/2022
IN THE MATTER OF:
KAMLA DEVI ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Mamta Pal, Advocate.
Versus
JEET SINGH & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rakesh, Advocate for
respondent No.1.
Mr. Archana Gaur and Ms.
Ridhima Gaur, Advocates for
respondent No.2.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi,
Standing Counsel (Civil), GNCTD
with Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr.
Siddharth Krishna Dwivedi and
Mr. Aditya S. Jadhav, Advocates.
Mr. Vimal Raj, Advocate for
Labour Commissioner.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 7143/2022 (Early Hearing)
1. The present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC read
with Section 4A and 25A of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 on
behalf of the appellant seeking early hearing of the appeal.
Digitally Signed
By:SANGEETA ANAND
Signing Date:25.04.2022
11:58:41
2. Mr. Rakesh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, and
Ms. Archana Gaur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2,
accept notice and fairly do not oppose the prayer made in the application.
3. In view of the averments made in the application and the no-
objection given by the learned counsels for the respondents, the
application is allowed and the date of hearing is preponed. Date fixed in
the matter stands cancelled.
4. Application is disposed of.
FAO 78/2018
1. With the consent of the parties, the present appeal is taken up for
hearing today itself.
2. By way of present appeal, the appellant (mother of the deceased)
has assailed the order dated 09.11.2017 passed by the learned Employee
Compensation Commissioner in Delhi Compensation Application No.
WCD/74/NW/2017/1131-32. The appellant also seeks relief of
complementary cost against the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned
order has been passed in a cryptic manner and shows complete non-
application of mind.
4. It is worthwhile to note that this Court, vide order dated
26.02.2018, had noted that the claim filed by the present appellant for
compensation, on account of death of her son due to an accident during
the course of his employment, was dismissed without referring to the
facts or discussing as to how it was without jurisdiction.
Digitally Signed
By:SANGEETA ANAND
Signing Date:25.04.2022
11:58:41
5. The impugned order reads as follows :-
"Smt. Kamla Devi Vs Jeet Singh & Ors.
9.11.2017 - For claimant: - Sh. Ravi Prakash Clerk of AR
R-1, None
R -1, Ms. Neeru Garg
Arguments heard.
For want of jurisdiction the matter is dismissed.
Sd
09.11.2017
WCD/74/NW/17"
6. There is no gainsaying that reasons form the heart and soul of
every order/pronouncement. Time and again, the Supreme Court has
reiterated the importance of citing reasons in an order. To elucidate, in
Secretary and Curator, Victoria Memorial Hall v. Howrah Ganatantrik
Nagrik Samity and Others reported as (2010) 3 SCC 732, it was opined
as follows:-
"40. It is a settled legal proposition that not only
administrative but also a judicial order must be
supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while
deciding an issue, the court is bound to give reasons for
its conclusion. It is the duty and obligation on the part of
the court to record reasons while disposing of the case.
The hallmark of an order and exercise of judicial power
by a judicial forum is to disclose its reasons by itself and
giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of
the fundamentals of sound administration of justice-
delivery system, to make known that there had been
proper and due application of mind to the issue before the
court and also as an essential requisite of the principles
of natural justice. "The giving of reasons for a decision is
an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of
a matter before courts, and which is the only indication to
know about the manner and quality of exercise
undertaken, as also the fact that the court concerned had
really applied its mind. " (Vide State of Orissa v.
Dhaniram Luhar and State of Rajasthan v. Sohan Lal)
Digitally Signed
By:SANGEETA ANAND
Signing Date:25.04.2022
11:58:41
41. Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It
introduces clarity in an order and without the same, it
becomes lifeless. Reasons substitute subjectivity by
objectivity. Absence of reasons renders the order
indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is
subject to further challenge before a higher forum. (Vide
Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar, SCC p. 527, para 19;
Vishnu Dev Sharma v. State of U.P., SAIL v. STO, State
of Uttaranchal v. Sunil Kumar Singh Negi; U.P. SRTC v.
Jagdish Prasad Gupta, Ram Phal v. State of Haryana,
Mohd. Yusuf v. Faij Mohammad and State of H.P. v. Sada
Ram.)
42. Thus, it is evident that the recording of reasons is
principle of natural justice and every judicial order must
be supported by reasons recorded in writing. It ensures
transparency and fairness in decision making. The person
who is adversely affected may know, as to why his
application has been rejected."
7. In the present case, a plain reading of the claim petition filed by
the claimants would show that it was averred that the deceased had died
on duty, while driving truck bearing registration No. HR-63B-1107 as a
paid driver, and as such the death had occurred during the course of
employment. The learned Commissioner however, while passing the
impugned order, neither adverted to the averments made in the claim
petition nor to any submissions made on behalf of the claimants.
8. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the impugned order cannot be
sustained. With the consent of the parties, the same is set aside. The
claim petition is restored at its original number and the matter is
remanded back with the direction to decide afresh in accordance with
law. The claim petition be listed at first instance before the concerned
Employee Compensation Commissioner on 28.04.2022. Considering the
Digitally Signed
By:SANGEETA ANAND
Signing Date:25.04.2022
11:58:41
fact that the claim pertains to the year 2017, the concerned Authority is
requested to decide the claim petition expeditiously.
9. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. However, in view of
the other directions contained in the order dated 26.02.2018 passed by
this Court, Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for
the GNCTD, seeks some time to take appropriate instructions as well as
steps for necessary compliance. For the aforesaid purpose, list the matter
on 15.07.2022.
(MANOJ KUMAR OHRI)
JUDGE
APRIL 19, 2022
ga
Digitally Signed
By:SANGEETA ANAND
Signing Date:25.04.2022
11:58:41
