Mukesh Kumar vs Vijay Dutt & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 2734 Del

                          $~1
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     CONT.CAS(C) 1087/2019
                                MUKESH KUMAR                                         ..... Petitioner
                                                     Through:     Mr. VivekKumar Tandon with
                                                                  Ms. Prerna Tandon, Advocates.
                                                     versus
                                VIJAY DUTT & ANR                                     ..... Respondents
                                                     Through:     Mr. Ravi Sikri, Sr. Advocate with
                                                                  Mr. Deepank Yadav, Mr. Jasbir
                                                                  Bidhuri and Ms. Akshita, Advocates
                                                                  for Ashok Hotel.
                          %                                   Date of Decision: 01st September, 2022.
                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
                                              JUDGMENT

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 25306/2022 (for restoration)

1. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed.

2. Cont.Cas(C) 1087/2019 is restored to its original number and is taken up for hearing today itself.

CONT.CAS(C) 1087/2019

3. Learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that the entire arrears of the wages, as directed by order dated 06.09.2011 and other consecutive orders of this Court, have been paid. However, learned counsel

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAJ BALA Signing Date:02.09.2022 17:59:19 for the applicant submits that the payments have been made as an unskilled worker whereas the petitioner/workman was a skilled worker. This question is to be determined at the time of disposal, as the main writ petition bearing WP(C) No.6765/2004 is still pending, and thus left open.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he accepts payment of the entire arrears without prejudice to the interest of his client and the question of skilled and unskilled workers may be left open to be decided at the time of final adjudication of the writ petition bearing WP(C) No.6765/2004. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent/management has not paid the interest.

5. It has been submitted that in the case titled as Mukesh Kumar vs. Vijay Dutt & Ors., CONT.CAS(C) 59/2017, the contempt petition arising out of the same case, this Court has granted a simple interest @ 9% per annum in the case of delayed payments.

6. In view of the order dated 29.08.2017, passed by this Court between the same parties in CONT.CAS(C) 59/2017, the respondent/management is liable to pay a simple interest @ 9% per annum on the delayed payments.

7. Learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that the payment of interest shall be made within four weeks.

8. With these observations, the present contempt petition stands disposed of.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J SEPTEMBER 01, 2022/st

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAJ BALA Signing Date:02.09.2022 17:59:19