JUDGEMENT
HIMA KOHLI, J. -
(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) against the award dated 9th March, 2001,
passed by the Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"),
whereunder while holding that the respondent, daughter of the deceased employee
of the petitioner was entitled for appointment at the post of LDC or an
equivalent post on compassionate grounds and that she was entitled to hold the
accommodation which was allotted to her deceased mother, the petitioner MCD
was directed to complete the necessary formalities regarding the appointment of
the respondent within one month from the date when the Award was to become
enforceable.
(2.) Briefly narrated, the facts of the case as set up by the
respondent in the statement of claim filed by her before the Tribunal are that
her mother, the deceased employee of the petitioner MCD died on 16th April, 1991
while in service as a permanent Ward Aya posted at Lajpat Nagar Hospital,
leaving behind her husband, daughter, i.e., the respondent aged 24 years at the
relevant time, and two younger sons. It was stated that one of the sons of the
deceased employee initially applied for compassionate appointment, but later on
it was decided to secure appointment in favour of the respondent, however, it
was only during the course of the conciliation proceedings that the petitioner
management agreed to supply the application form to her. It was further stated
that though she tried to submit the form to the Resident Medical Superintendent,
Lajpat Nagar Hospital, but on his refusal to accept the same, it was submitted
to the Asst. Labour Officer, MCD on 23rd October, 1992. Having received no reply
to the same, the respondent assumed that her application was rejected.
Thereafter the conciliation proceedings failed and the dispute was referred for
adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the
Tribunal") in the following terms of reference:
"Whether Miss Madhubala is entitled to be appointed on compassionate ground and
if so, that directions are necessary in this respect"
"Whether the residential accommodation allotted to Smt. Chadra, mother of Miss
Madhubala should be regularized/allotted in the name of Miss Madhubala and if
so, what directions are necessary in this respect"
(3.) The claim of the respondent was resisted by the petitioner MCD
by way of filing the written statement and the main objection taken therein was
that she was not entitled to be appointed on compassionate grounds since
sufficient retiral benefits had been released to the family. On the basis of the
pleadings of the parties, issues were framed which was followed by the parties
advancing their arguments and leading evidence, based on which the learned
Presiding Officer came to the conclusion that it was not acceptable that the
respondent had not applied for compassionate appointment and also that the
respondent did submit her application for the same on the intervention of the
conciliation officer. The Tribunal took note of the fact that the management did
not apply its mind on the application even after a long time had passed and the
same was rejected without any communication to the respondent, and also that no
ground was made out by the petitioner MCD to prove that the respondent was not
entitled to be appointed on compassionate basis. Accordingly, the impugned award
was passed by which it was directed that the respondent be appointed on
compassionate grounds and also that she was entitled to hold in her possession
the accommodation that was allotted to her mother. Aggrieved by the said award,
the petitioner MCD has approached this Court.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.