D T C Vs. SATISH KUMAR (DECED) THR LRS
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D T C
SATISH KUMAR (DECED) THR LRS
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Counsel for the petitioner has obtained instructions from his
client and submits that the possibility of granting pensionery benefits to the
legal heirs of the deceased respondent/workman from the date of his death i.e.
w.e.f. 2.4.2000 onwards, while foregoing the back wages payable to him, is not
acceptable to the petitioner for the reason that the deceased respondent/workman
was removed from service on 20.8.1992 and that he did not opt for pension. In
fact, it is stated that on 13.5.1993, he received the share of the employer as
well as that of the employee payable towards pension. It is further stated
that the deceased respondent/workman also did not chose to avail of the scheme
reopened by the petitioner in the year 1998 for grant of pension.
(2.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
against the order dated 5th October, 2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in
O.P. No.376/1992, whereunder the application filed by the petitioner/DTC under
Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the Act") was
(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1 was
appointed as an Assistant Fitter with the petitioner/management on 21.8.1982.
It is a case of the petitioner that the deceased respondent/workman absented
himself from duty unauthorizedly for the period from 14.1.1991 to 13.5.1991 and
again from 11.6.1991 to 31.12.1991 without submission of leave application/prior
sanction of leave from the competent authority. On 1.4.1992, one Shri Mukesh
Kumar Sharma, Junior Clerk (PBC W.Shop), submitted a report dated 1.4.1992
informing that the respondent was absent from duty for 58 days without
submission of leave application or prior sanction of leave. As a result,
disciplinary proceedings were initiated by the petitioner/management against the
respondent and on 3.4.1992, a charge sheet was served upon him. Thereafter,
inquiry proceedings were held in respect of the charge sheet and the Inquiry
Officer gave a report against the respondent/workman which was accepted by the
disciplinary authority and it was decided to remove him from the services of the
Corporation, vide order dated 20th August, 1992. Simultaneously, the
petitioner/management filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act
seeking approval of its action to remove the respondent/workman from service.
The application was considered by the Industrial Tribunal and a preliminary
issue was framed to the following effect :
"Whether the applicant held a legal and valid enquiry against the respondent
according to principles of natural justice.";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.