(1.) The present writ petition filed by the Management/New Delhi Municipal Corporation assails the award dated 02.03.2016 passed by the learned Labour Court-XVII, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in ID No.1199/16. Under the impugned award, the Labour Court has, while rejecting the respondent's claim to be regularised as a Pump Driver, directed the petitioner to regularise him on the post of Khalasi (Group-D) w.e.f. 02.06.1986 and grant him all consequential benefits arising therefrom.
(2.) The respondent, having joined the petitioner/corporation as a Pump Driver in December, 1981, was brought on the regular muster roll of this post w.e.f. 10.02.1983. Aggrieved by his non- regularisation, despite rendering over 5 years of service at the corporation, the respondent made several representations to the petitioner seeking his regularisation. The petitioner considered his grievance and, notwithstanding the recommendation of its officers to regularise the respondent as a Pump Driver by granting him relaxation, informed the respondent vide its letter Ex.MW1/3 that he was not eligible for regularisation. The petitioner, instead, advised the respondent to accept its offer, made vide office order dated 10.11.1986, to regularise him at the post of Khalasi. However, the respondent refused this offer and continued to claim regularisation as a Pump Driver, for which purpose he even met the petitioner's Chairman in April, 2003. Subsequently, vide letter dated 02.06.2003, the petitioner once again asked the respondent to accept regularisation on the post of Khalasi. Aggrieved by the petitioner's refusal to regularise him on the post of Pump Driver, the respondent raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court.
(3.) Before the Labour Court, the petitioner opposed the respondent's claim and reiterated that the respondent was eligible only for being regularised as a Khalasi as he did not fulfil the requisite qualifications for the post of Pump Driver. The petitioner claimed that it had made repeated efforts to convince the respondent on this aspect, which had been thwarted and, therefore, his claim was liable to be rejected. In support thereof, the petitioner filed its evidence by way of affidavit as also a copy of the letter which was purportedly dated 02.06.1986 wherein the respondent was advised to accept the offer of regularisation as a Khalasi.