Delhi High Court
Hospital Employees Union vs North Delhi Municipal ... on 27 May, 2022
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 27.05.2022
+ LPA 361/2022 & CM APPLs. 25592-25594/2022
HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES UNION ..... Appellant
Through: Mr Naveen R. Nath, Sr.
Advocate with Ms Lalit Mohini
Bhat, Mr Abhimanyu Verma
and Mr Anirudh R. Bhat,
Advocates.
versus
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
& ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Namrita Mukim, Standing
Counsel for North MCD with
Ms Garima Jindal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
NAJMI WAZRI, J. (ORAL)
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and
virtual hearing).
1. Issue notice. The learned counsel named above accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. At joint request, the petition is taken up for disposal.
3. The appellant is aggrieved by the observations made in the
judgment dated 25.03.2021 and the order dated 22.02.2022,
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
in W.P (C) 8612/2019 which has held inter alia as under:-
"...7. Before the Labour Court, on behalf of the
Workman, the Secretary of the Union, Mr. Surender
Bhardwaj also gave evidence. In his affidavit, he also
states that the Workman is entitled to compassionate
appointment. The statement today made by the Workman
clearly shows that he has informed the Union and its
office bearers about his employment. The affidavit of Mr
Surender Bhardwaj, reads as under:
"3. The deponent submits that as the workman
concerned, approached our union for securing his
appointment on compassionate ground on any
suitable post on regular basis in proper pay scale
and allowances with retrospective from the date of
death of his father." Consequently, a resolution
was also passed in the meeting of union held on
08.10.2008. A copy of said resolution is already on
record marked as Ext. WWR/4.
4. The deponent further submits that Sh. Rajiv
Agarwal is the General Secretary of Hospital
Employees Union. I am also part and parcel of the
Hospital Employees' Union since last many years
and as such I have seen Sh. Rajiv Agarwal writing
and signing and as such, I can identify the
signature.
5. The deponent submits that, as such the case of
the workman concerned was duly espoused by our
union and as such our union is pursuing for
redressal of grievance of the workman concerned."
.......................
8. In the cross-examination of Mr. Surender Bhardwaj
also, the Labour Court has not been informed that the
Workman was already employed. From the above
affidavit it appears that the counsel appearing for the
Workman herein, had signed the documents on behalf of
the Union, in his capacity as General Secretary of the
Union.
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
..................
12. All these facts clearly appear to be well within the
knowledge of the Workman, the office bearers of the
Union as also the various representatives for the
Workman, including the Id. counsel for Workman,
however, there has been a clear concealment of material
facts leading to the Labour Court passing the impugned
award dated 1st February, 2019 by which compassionate
appointment has been directed to be given to the
Workman.
.....................
14. Mr. Surender Bhardwaj, Secretary of the Union who
deposed on behalf of the Workman is directed to be
physically present before the Court on the next date. In
case, Mr. Bhardwaj, is no longer the Secretary of the
Union, the present General Secretary of the Union shall,
in addition, be also present before the Court. The
General Secretary of the Union shall be served at:
Hospital Employees Union, Agarwal Bhawan, GT Road,
Tis Hazari, Delhi-54. Mr. Surender Bhadwaj, shall be
served on his mobile Number-9873376166.".....
The said judgment dated 25.03.2021 has held inter alia as
under:-
".....18. From the facts that emerge, it is clear that all is
not well in the manner in which the matter has
proceeded all through since the time of filing of
application for compassionate appointment. The
Workman has resorted to falsity since inception, i.e., the
filing of the application giving of incorrect information,
non-disclosure of all particulars of his employment and
an impression has been sought to be portrayed that the
Workman was in penury and his family was destitute,
while the actual fact was that the Workman was working
in a government institution during this entire period.
The explanation given by the Workman today is that he
was told by some employees of the Corporation and by
the Union that since he was under contractual
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
employment the same would not be construed as regular
employment and need not be disclosed at the time of
filing the application for compassion appointment. The
exact truth of the statement obviously cannot be
ascertained by this Court at this stage of these
proceedings as the same is in the realm of past events, of
which the Workman claims to state his own version. On
the other hand, the Secretary of the Union who had
signed the espousal before the CGIT, is in the Court and
takes a position that the Workman had neither informed
him nor the Union of the fact that he was employed.
19. The purpose of compassionate appointment is to
help and support the family of a deceased employee who
may be in dire need. This Court cannot condone the fact
that there has been misrepresentation and concealment
on behalf of the Workman and Union in this matter.
Moreover, the fact that the ld. counsel appearing for the
Union is also General Secretary of the Union also blurs
the distinction between the client and the advocate
which ought not to ideally happen. The Workman has
clearly given misleading affidavits before this Court
which have been espoused by the Union and its ld.
counsel before the Court. The entire turn of events is
clearly not palatable. While in general, workmen's
applications for compassionate appointment deserve
sympathetic consideration, they cannot be permitted to
mislead and make false statements. The Workman in this
case ought to have candidly disclosed in his application
for compassionate appointment that he has some sort of
contractual appointment and then sought regular
employment from the Corporation. Such a stand would
have been fair and truthful. Concealing the entire
factum of employment in another government institution
from the Corporation and the Court is clearly deliberate
and cannot be held to be innocent.
20. The Union and its representatives ought to also have
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
been careful in this matter while prosecuting the
application on behalf of the Workman. There was also
some responsibility on the part of the ld. Counsel who
was the General Secretary and Secretary of the Union to
also ascertain the true facts and present them in a
proper manner.
....................................
23. Under these circumstances, the following directions
are issued:
(iii). This Court does not appreciate the stand of the
Union that it was never aware that the Workman was
employed. The Workman's statement to the contrary
that he had informed the Union, was recorded on the
last date and the same stance is reiterated by the
Workman today as well in the Court. The Union is
accordingly directed that in future whenever espousal
of cause is taken up on behalf of any Workman,
especially for compassionate appointment or any other
similar application, before the Management or before
the Labour Court/CGIT, the correct facts shall be
ascertained regarding the employment status
contractual or otherwise, of the applicant. In the
present case, the Union has more than 3000 members.
It is an active Union which ought to be careful so as to
ensure that wrong facts are not placed before this
Court or the Labour Courts and CGIT. Accordingly,
costs of Rs.50,000/- shall be deposited by the Union
with the Corporation within four weeks. The Union
shall ensure that such conduct is not repeated in the
future."..............
( emphasis supplied)
4. The learned Senior Advocate for the appellant submits that
while the said order itself records that there was no proof of
the workman having informed the General
Secretary/Secretary of the Union, of the former being in
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
employment at a time of making of the application for
compassionate appointment, no inference could possibly
have been drawn, as noted here above in para 23 of the
judgement with which the appellant has a grievance. In
paragraph 18, the Court has recorded, inter alia, as under:-
"...18.....On the other hand, the Secretary of the Union
who had signed the espousal before the CGIT, is in the
Court and takes a position that the Workman had
neither informed him nor the Union of the fact that he
was employed." ....
5. The observations as noted hereinabove would have an
adverse effect on the goodwill and fair name of the General
Secretary/Secretary as leader of the Employees' Union,
which represents approximately 3000 employees.
6. The learned counsel for the Corporation/respondent submits
that the workman had indeed informed the General
Secretary/Secretary of the Union. However, to the court's
query as to whether there is any proof of the same, the
answer is in the negative. Therefore, in the absence of any
proof or data indicating that due information had been given
to the General Secretary/Secretary of the Union, the drawing
of adverse inference apropos his conduct or integrity, would
be unjustified.
7. In view of the above, the observations made against the
Union and its General Secretary/Secretary in the impugned
judgment are set aside, so is direction for deposit of costs of
Rs.50,000/-.
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
8. With the aforesaid modification in the impugned judgment,
the appeal along with pending applications, if any, is
disposed off.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J
MAY 27, 2022/dss/MK
Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH
KUMAR
Signing Date:03.06.2022
19:10:46
