Full Text
LPA 325/2006
D.T.C. Appellant Represented by: Mr.D.S.Mishra, Advocate for
Mr.Anand Nandan, Advocate
D.T.C. Appellant Represented by: Mr.Manoj Kumar, Advocate with
Ms.Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
11.09.2015
ORDER
1. The appeals have been listed by the Registry on being noted that they were adjourned sine die to await the decision ofthe Supreme Court in SLP
(C) No.1506/2007 and connected Petitions seeking Special Leave to Appeal.
2. Issue concerns a batch of employees who had gone on a strike and services were terminated without holding an inquiry. The individual LPA 325/2006&LPA 307/2007 p^ge] of[3] 2015:DHC:11204-DB employee succeeded before the Labour Court. Awards in their favour were upheld by learned Single Judges ofthis Court. In some cases Letters Patent Appeals filed were dismissed and this explains the DTC proceeding to the Supreme Court.
3. Instant two appeals were filed at a stage when Petitions seeking Special Leave to Appeal against large number of decisions in appeals were pendingbefore the Supreme Court.
4. On February 11, 2010, granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court directed that such workmen who had not crossed the age of superannuation would be reinstated forthwith and would be paid 50% back wages. Payment ofbalance amount in terms ofthe award impugned was stayed.
5. Similar orders havebeenpassedin the instantappeals.
6. In our opinion it would be useless for us to keep these appeals pending for the reason as regards this Court is concerned, the law has attained finality in favour of the workmen. Depending upon what decision the Supreme Court finally takes would depend the ultimate fate of the workmen concerned.
7. We note that the two respondents in the captioned appeals have been reinstated in service and statement has been made on an earlier occasion by learned counsel for DTC that 50% back wages have been paid to the said two workmen, in harmony with the order passed by the Supreme Court on February 11, 2010.
8. We dispose of both appeals issuing a declaratory order. The declaratory orderwouldbe that if the Supreme Courtupholds the earlier LFA 325/2006 c£ LPA 307/2007 page 2 of[3] decisions passed by this Court in favour of the workmen, the respondent No.1 in both the appeals would be entitled to full benefit ofthe award. Ifthe earlier decisions passed by this Court are modified, full or in part, by the Supreme Court the said decision would bind the appellant as well as the workmen in the two appeals.
9. So observing and declaring the two appeals are disposed of.
10. No costs.
PRADEEP NANDI^JOG, J. MUKTA GUPTA, J. SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 mamta