DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. RAM NIWAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 7th December, 2005 passed by Ld. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No.VII, Delhi by which the application of the respondent/workman under section 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short referred to as the Act) has been allowed.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the present case are as under:- Respondent/workman was appointed as a Conductor with petitioner/management on 24th September, 1983. His services were terminated on the ground of alleged misconduct i.e. he was caught red handed by the police while he was deflating the tyre of DTC bus at Lajpat Nagar on 16.5.1985. Respondent/workman raised an industrial dispute challenging the termination as illegal and unjustified. The appropriate Government referred the same for adjudication to the Labour Court, Delhi on 27th October, 1987. Vide award dated 1st December, 1994, the Labour Court held that respondent/workman is entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service. No back wages were awarded to him. The said award was not challenged by the petitioner/management. The respondent/workman joined the duty on 12th August, 1996. In the year 1999, respondent/workman filed an application under section 33(C)(2) of the Act claiming that after the passing of award dated 1.12.1994, he kept on visiting the petitioner/management. Initially, he was not taken on duty. Finally, he was taken on duty on 12th August, 1996, as such, he filed the application under Section 33 (C)(2) of the Act for directions to the petitioner/management to pay him wages for the period from 1st December, 1994 to 12th August, 1996 and also to pay him wages from 12.8.1996 to 1.1.1999 at enhanced rate without any deduction. The said application was contested by the petitioner/management, mainly on the ground that the respondent/workman did not report for duty after passing of award dated 1.12.1994. As soon as he reported on 12.8.1996, he was taken on duty. Further, the stand of management is that at the time of joining, he entered into an agreement/settlement with the management that he would not claim back wages on being reinstated, as such, respondent is not entitled for any claim.

(3.) On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Labour Court framed the following issues:-