CSIR Indian Institute of Petroleum v. Vijay Kumar Sharma & Anr.

1. Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 11305/2019 & C.M. No.46550/2019 (stay)

3. The present writ petition by the Management assails the Award dated 06.04.2016 passed the learned Labour Court-II, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in ID No.54/2009. Under the impugned Award the Labour Court, after holding that the respondent’s services were 2019:DHC:5493 terminated without paying him any retrenchment compensation, has directed the petitioner to pay him a lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

4. At the outset, it is noted that the impugned Award is sought to be assailed by the petitioner after more than 3½ years and no explanation whatsoever for this inordinate delay has been given in the writ petition. During arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over a copy of the letter dated 02.07.2018 claimed to have been received by the petitioner from the labour court only on 14.08.2018, whereby it was intimated of the Award being passed. A copy of the letter dated 02.07.2018 is taken on record. By placing reliance on this letter, he submits that since the petitioner came to learn about the impugned Award only on 14.08.2018, the delay in approaching this Court should be considered only w.e.f. 14.08.2018 and not from the date of the impugned Award.

5. In my view the explanation sought to be advanced by the petitioner does not offer a justifiable reason for this inordinate delay, especially when seen in the light of the fact that the petitioner was a party to the proceedings before the Labour Court. Even otherwise the Labour Court has, in the impugned Award, comprehensively dealt with the arguments, pleadings and evidence placed on record by both the parties before deciding in favour of the respondent workman and awarding him a compensation of only a sum of Rs.50,000/-, which amount cannot, in any manner, be deemed as an exorbitant liability upon the petitioner organisation. In the light of the aforesaid, I find that no sufficient ground has been made out to condone the inordinate delay of 3 ½ years occasioned by the petitioner in instituting the present petition.

6. In these circumstances, I find no reason to exercise my writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the present petition to interfere with the impugned Award.

7. The writ petition, along with the pending application, is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches itself, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the Award.

REKHA PALLI, J. OCTOBER 23, 2019 ‘SDP’