Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 24th January, 2022
MANMOD SHANKAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Charu Sharma & Ms. Tanya Singh, Advocates.
Through: Mr. Mohinder Singh, Advocate.
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing. CM APPL. 46487/2021 in W.P.(C) 6310/2019
2. Vide this application, the Petitioner/Workman (hereinafter “Workman”) seeks the opening of the sealed cover submitted by the Respondent/ Management (hereinafter “Management”) in relation with the result of the interview of Workman conducted for the post of HGA. It also seeks directions to the Management for granting promotion and increment payable to the Workman.
3. The background of the matter is that the present petition was filed by the Workman challenging the award dated 11th February 2019 passed by the Labour Court in ID No. 04/2017 titled Shri Manmod Shankar v M/s LIC of India & Anr. vide which the Labour Court directed reinstatement of Workman into service without any pecuniary/ monetary benefit from the date of Workman’s removal till the publication of award. The award was challenged by both, the Management vide W.P.(C) 6214/2019 titled Life 2022:DHC:301 Insurance Corporation of India v. Sh Manmod Shankar, and the Workman vide W.P.(C) 6310/2019 (the present petition) titled Sh. Manmod Shankar v. Life Insurance Corporation of India. This Court dismissed both the petitions vide a common judgment dated 29th June 2020 while upholding the Labour Court’s order reinstating the Workman without back wages.
4. On the previous date, the Registry had informed this Court that a Special Leave Petition SLP(C) No. 11401/2020 titled Manmod Shankar v LIC of India & Anr. was preferred by the Workman challenging the said judgment passed by this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 1st October 2020. However, neither is the factum of the SLP being preferred by the Workman against the judgment of this Court mentioned in the present application nor has the order passed by the Supreme Court been filed on the record of this Court.
5. Notably, an LPA had also been filed by the Workman being LPA No.93/2021 titled Mahmof Shankar v. LIC of India & Anr., challenging the judgment of this Court dated 29th June, 2020, and the same was dismissed by the Ld. Division Bench, vide order dated 4th March, 2021. This fact has also not been brought to the notice of this Court by the Workman.
6. In view of these facts, vide previous order dated 21st December, 2021, this Court had directed that the judgments in the said SLP and LPA be brought on record. The same are now on record.
7. As for the present application, being CM 46487/2021, the Workman seeks the following reliefs: “a) Open and publish the result of the petitioner filed by the respondent no. I corporation and kept in a scaled cover along with records of this present petition, and /or; b) Direct the respondents to grant back dated four promotions to the petitioner, which became due and payable during the service period of the petitioner with the respondent no. 1 corporation from the date of joining till his retirement and accordingly direct torevise the pension on the basis of the grade pay payable at the time of his retirement, and/or; c) Direct the respondents to grant grade promotion increments on the basis of the said promotions due to the petitioner from the date of joining till his retirement and/or grant annual increments due and payable to the petitioner for his services from the year 2010 till his retirement, and/or; d) Allow any other relief which this Hon 'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present matter.”
8. It is surprising that in the application, there is no mention of the LPA filed by the Workman challenging the judgment of this Court dated 29th June, 2020 and even the SLP order has not been disclosed in the application. Today, Mr. Mohinder Singh, ld. Counsel for LIC, submits that the Workman has also moved to the CGIT in respect of seeking various increments and other monetary benefits.
9. This Court has perused the order passed by the Supreme Court dated 1st October, 2020 which reads as under:
10. The Court has also perused the order passed by the Ld. Division Bench in LPA 93/2021 dated 4th March, 2021, the relevant excerpt of which read as under:
11. The present application is conspicuously silent on all these aspects. Moreover, the sealed cover has since been opened by this Court and as per the report, the Workman was not selected for promotion by the Committee in the interview dated 10th February, 2020 for the post of HGA, Administration. The document in the said sealed cover has been opened. Let the same be scanned and tagged along with the record of the present writ petition.
12. Insofar as the other benefits which the Workman seeks in this application, since the writ petition has already been disposed of, no further orders as prayed for, can be granted.
13. The present application is disposed of in these terms.
14. It is made clear however, that if the Workman has approached the CGIT, the CGIT shall consider the claims of the Workman in accordance with law and in accordance with the judgment dated 29th June, 2020, and the orders passed by the ld. Division Bench and the Supreme Court in LPA 93/2021 and in SLP(C) No. 11401/2020.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE JANUARY 24, 2022/Aman/MS