ROSHAN SINGH Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the DTC states that in all there were 325 cases in which there were refusal of the Labour Court/Tribunal to approve the order of dismissal, by way of the application(s), moved by the respondent, DTC under 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act(hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). She further submits that out of 325 cases, challenges had been made to 221 such orders and in respect of 28 cases decision to challenge had been taken and papers entrusted to counsel. She also submitted that in six cases employees have been taken back on duty by the DTC and this leaves a total of 70 cases where the orders under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Act were not challenged. It is the cases of some of these employees, i.e., CW 1673/02 with CWS 1951/02, 383/03, 2219/03, 2345/03, 8010/02 & 4826/01 which will be governed and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Rule. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petitions are taken up today for hearing.

(3.) This writ petition and the other connected writ petitions seek a mandamus for continued service with the respondent/DTC of the petitioners, workmen as the petitioners have not been given consequential benefits of arrears and employment with the respondent in spite of the rejection of the approval application moved under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Act by the respondent/DTC. The rejection of the approval has not been challenged by the DTC and has become final.