V K SHARMA Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the order dated 3rd September, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, which was filed challenging the award dated 20th February, 2007.
(2.) THE services of the appellant herein, who was working as Manager, were terminated by the management. Consequent upon which he raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to the Labour Court on the following terms:
"whether the services of Sh. V. K. Sharma, S/o Sh. B. D. Sharma, R/o 972, Sector -III, R. K. Puram, New Delhi 110 022 have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what sum of money as monetary relief alongwith consequential benefits in terms of existing laws / Government notification and to what other relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?"
(3.) AFTER the aforesaid reference was entertained, statement of claim and written statement was filed by the parties, evidence was also led by the parties in support of their case. The learned Labour Court thereafter appreciated the evidence on record particularly with regard to the contentions raised by the management that the appellant is not a workman. On appreciation of the evidence, it was held by the Labour Court that at the time when the services of the appellant were terminated, he was working as a Manager and was discharging the functions of a Supervisor. In support of the said findings, the learned Labour Court has referred to the evidence adduced like the fact that 18 employees were working in the staff canteen under the appellant and that when he handed over the charge, he handed over the charge to the Coupon Clerk along with cash of Rs. 10,000/- stock register, keys of the office. From the aforesaid evidence it was deduced by the learned Labour Court that the said evidence conclusively proves and establishes that the appellant was in-charge of the store and canteen. The learned Labour Court also referred to the fact that on the aforesaid issue there was no cross examination sought by the workman and, therefore, the evidence which is led showing that the appellant was working as a supervisor went unrebutted. On the basis of the evidence on record, the learned Labour Court gave a finding that the appellant was performing mainly managerial and administrative work and he was supervising the work of other staff members in the canteen.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.