Director General of Works (CPWD) v. Laljeet Yadav and Ors.

1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

2. As per the Registry’s report, Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have already been served in this matter. Though fresh service was ordered vide order dated 15th April, 2021, the process fee is yet to be filed.

3. It is noticed that all the Respondents have been served. One last and final opportunity is given to Respondent Nos. 1-3 to enter appearance. If they do not enter appearance, the matter would proceed further on the next date of hearing.

4. List before the Registrar on 20th September, 2021 for verifying service of intimation to Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 on their mobile numbers/email addresses as shown in the memo of parties.

5. List before Court on 29th October, 2021.

6. This Court has noticed that in several matters which involve Workmen and Management in which awards of the Labour Court are challenged before this Court, service of the Workmen/Management consumes a substantial amount of time as the awards do not contain the contact details of the Workmen or the Management. 2021:DHC:2093

7. During the Covid-19 pandemic, when service is being done through electronic mode, the effecting of service has proved to be a challenge and matters continue to remain pending for several months without service being effected. Further, whenever this Court has passed orders directing deposit of amounts with the ld. Registrar General of this Court and in cases where service has not been effected, the Workmen are unable to even move applications for release of litigation expenses or any part of the awarded amount.

8. It is, therefore, imperative that the Workmen and the Management are served at the earliest possible occasion and, in fact, advance copies are served upon them even before the matter is listed. This would also enable Courts to explore if any settlements are possible between the Management and the Workmen on the first date of hearing.

9. Accordingly, the following directions are issued to the Labour Courts, Authorities and Tribunals which are dealing with disputes between Workmen and Management, including disputes relating to termination, suspension etc., under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Employees’ Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 etc.:-

(i) Labour Courts, Authorities and Tribunals shall in the final awards/orders passed by them, include the complete details of the authorized representative of the Management in the cause title/memo of parties, including the mobile number and email address of the Management.

(ii) Additionally, most Workmen are represented through Unions in the

Labour Courts, Authorities and Tribunals. However, the beneficiaries in respect of the awards and orders are the individual Workmen, whose details are not available except their names. Accordingly, it is directed that when awards and orders are passed by the Labour Courts, Authorities and Tribunals, the following details be added in the cause title which forms part of the orders/awards and/or judgements: i. permanent address of the Workmen along with any other address available on record; ii. mobile number of the workmen or authorised signatory; iii. details of one of their immediate family members, for example, the spouse or child of the Workmen, if deemed appropriate, iv. Aadhaar number/any other valid government identity card number of the Workmen.

10. This would enable advance copies to be served upon the Management and the Workmen so that they can be represented on the first date when the Court hears the matters. This would also enable expeditious delivery of notices upon the Management and Workmen, once the petition is entertained by the Court.

11. Let this order be circulated by the worthy Registrar General, to all Labour Courts, Authorities and Tribunals, in order to ensure the implementation of the same w.e.f., 1st of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as the certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of orders shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE JULY 16, 2021 MR/AD/T