Sunday, February 17, 2019

05 February 2019 – Delhi School Tribunal – Simmi Khatpal Vs. Hanuman Mandir Public School - Unrecognized schools in Delhi are bound by the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 - Termination of service held illegal and directed reinstatement in service


Simmi Khathpal, Assistant Teacher, was terminated from service by Hanuman Mandir Public School. The termination of service was not in accordance with the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973.

Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, appearing for Ms. Simmi Khatpal, submitted that even unrecognized schools in Delhi are bound by the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and termination of service in violation of the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 is illegal. It was also submitted on behalf of Ms. Simmi Khatpal that after working for 3 years, an employee is deemed to be a confirmed/permanent employee.

Shri V.K. Maheshwari, Presiding Officer, Delhi School Tribunal, Delhi, accepted the submissions made on behalf of Ms. Simmi Khatpal and declared the termination of her service as illegal. The Hon’ble Tribunal directed the school to reinstate Ms. Simmi Khatpal in service and also declared that Ms. Simmi Khatpal was a deemed confirmed employee.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

25 years after removal from service, 10 years after his death, DTC conductor gets exonerated from the charge of misappropriating Re. 1/- - Delhi High Court directed the DTC to pay full back wages up to the date of death, all terminal dues and allowed the appeal with cost of Rs. 20,000/- and interest to be calculated @ 6% p.a.


10.01.2019 – Delhi High Court (Division Bench) – L.P.A. No. 484/2017 – “Shirani Devi & Ors. vs. The Management of M/s Delhi Transport Corporation

On the allegation of misappropriating one rupee, Late Ambika Ram was removed from DTC service in the year 1993. Charge against Ambika Ram was that while working as a conductor with DTC, he sold/gave Re. 1/- ticket but charged Rs. 2/- for the same from a passenger.

Ambika Ram succeeded before the Labour Court in the year 2002 but Hon’ble Delhi High Court (Single Bench), vide Order dated 19.04.2017, reversed the findings of the Labour Court and upheld the removal order. During the pendency of the case before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court (Single Bench), Ambika Ram expired in the year 2008. Legal heirs of Late Ambika Ram preferred a Letters Patent Appeal (L.P.A. No. 484/2017) against the Order dated 19.04.2017 before the Division Bench of Hon’ble Delhi High Court.

Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, appearing for the legal heirs of Late Ambika Ram, submitted that there was absolutely no evidence to hold Ambika Ram guilty. It was further submitted that Ambika Ram had offered to check his cash bag and the checking team failed to check his cash bag despite the said offer.

Hon'ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula, Delhi High Court, accepted the submissions made on behalf of the deceased conductor and allowed the appeal with cost of Rs. 20,000/-. It was declared that the legal heirs of the deceased workman would be entitled to full back wages from the date of removal from service up to the date of death with all the terminal benefits along with interest thereupon @ 6% p.a.




Sunday, January 6, 2019

21.12.2018 – Delhi High Court (Division Bench) - Recovery of excess payment from the retiral dues of a group ‘C’ employee – Held, illegal - Employee held entitled to refund of the recoveries made by the employer (NDMC)


On 21.12.2018, the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court declared that excess payment made by the employer to the employee cannot be recovered from the retiral dues of the employee.

Anuj Aggarwal & Tenzing Thinlay Lepcha, Advocates, counsels for the employee, submitted that Shri. Sukhbir Singh was a group ‘C’ employee and the recovery from his retiral dues was impermissible in law.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi & Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Chawla, Delhi High Court, accepted the submission made on behalf of the employee and directed the employer (North Delhi Municipal Corporation) to refund the recoveries made from the retiral dues of Shri. Sukhbir Singh.



Sunday, December 16, 2018

Labour Court, Dwarka - Burden of proving employer & employee relationship is upon the worker and the said burden can be discharged only by leading cogent evidence


On 14 December 2018, Labour Court, Dwarka, passed an Award in LIR No. 1937/16, wherein it was held that the workers therein are not entitled to any relief.

Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, appearing for M/s Frigorifico Allana Pvt. Ltd. (management), argued that the burden of proving the employer and employee relationship is upon the worker and the workmen, in the case, had not produced any document to prove that they were employees of the management.

Shri Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Presiding Officer, Labour Court – XIX, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, accepted the submission made by the counsel for the management and declared that there is no employer and employee relationship between the management and the workers and, therefore the workers are not entitled to any relief. Reference was, thus, answered in favour of the management.

http://advocateanujaggarwal.com/admin/img/Finalist/2018121615449508472018%20-%20Ved%20Prakash%20&%20Sanjay.pdf

Sunday, December 2, 2018

Sexual Harassment of a female sweeper


Sexual Harassment of a female sweeper - Termination of service by Guru Nanak Public School of a driver and a conductor on the allegations of Sexual Harassment of a female sweeper – Delhi School Tribunal declared the termination of service of both the employees as illegal and directed the School to reinstatement them in service

On 20.11.2018, the Hon’ble Delhi School Tribunal, in Appeal No. 17/2018 and Appeal No. 18/2018, declared the termination of service of 2 employees (Karamvir and Amit) as illegal and directed Guru Nanak Public School to reinstatement them in service. The services of both the employees were terminated on the alleged ground of sexual harassment of a female sweeper.

Shri. Karamvir and Shri. Amit were working as driver and conductor respectively with Guru Nanak Public School, Pushpanjali Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi-110034. On 13.09.2017, an FIR [FIR No. 1246] was registered by a female sweeper against Karamvir and Amit with the allegations of sexual harassment. Next day i.e. on 14.09.2018, vide letter/order dated 14.09.2017, the services of both the employees were terminated.

Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, counsel for Karamvir and Amit, submitted that the termination of service of both the employees was in complete violation of the principles of natural justice, provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and the Rules made thereunder.

Shri. V.K. Maehshwari, Presiding Officer, Delhi School Tribunal, Delhi, accepted the submissions made by Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate and declared that the termination orders dated 14.09.2017 were illegal and, consequently, directed Guru Nanak Public School to reinstate both the employees in service.




Monday, November 5, 2018

Labour Court, Dwarka – Illegal termination of service of a Sr. Service Technician by M/s BSH Household Appliances Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. – Labour Court awarded reinstatement in service with full back wages, continuity of service and with all other consequential benefits


On 11 October, 2018, Labour Court, Dwarka, declared the termination of service of a Sr. Service Technician (Sh. Vikas Kumar Sharma) by M/s BSH Household Appliances Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. as illegal and awarded reinstatement in service with full back wages, continuity of service and with all other consequential benefits.

Sh. Vikas Kumar Sharma (workman) was appointed by M/s B.S.H. Household Appliances Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. (management) on 08.03.2004. After working continuously for almost 10 years, the management terminated the service of the workman on 19.01.2014. Contention of the management was that the workman was an employee of a contractor and there was no employer-employee relationship between the management and the workman.

Anuj Aggarwal & Ashish Jha, Advocates, appearing for the workman, argued that the appointment letter, confirmation letter as well as the promotional letters were issued by the management and, therefore, M/s B.S.H. Household Appliances Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. was the employer of the workman and the action of the management of terminating the services of the workman was illegal and in violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Sh. Vinay Singhal, Addl. District & Sessions Judge, POLC–V, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, accepted the submissions made the counsels for the workman. The Hon’ble Labour Court declared the termination as illegal and directed M/s B.S.H. Household Appliances Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. to reinstatement the workman in service with full back wages along with continuity of service and with all other consequential benefits.