SHIV RANI Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed by the four petitioners. The four petitioners are legal heirs of one Sh. Ramphal. Sh. Ramphal worked as a Gardener with the respondent No.2-school. The late Sh. Ramphal just before his retirement claimed certain dues for his entire service period of 17 years from the respondent No.2 on the ground that he was inadequately paid. Sh. Ramphal after receiving his retirement dues initiated proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ,,the Act), and in which proceedings the only relief which was prayed for by Sh. Ramphal was payment of earned leaves. No other benefit of any other monetary emoluments was claimed.

(2.) BEFORE the Conciliation Officer, under the Act, a Memorandum of Settlement was entered into on 11.1.2010 and which reads as under:-

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioners also vehemently and passionately contended that the petitioners are poor people and therefore Court must exercise the discretion in favour of these poor people. In my opinion, the issue of poverty will definitely weigh with the Court provided within the legal bounds it is possible to give relief. The fact of the matter is that the claims which are now made in this writ petition were not made by late Sh. Ramphal under the Act. It is settled law that an employee of a school can either invoke the jurisdiction of a writ petition before this Court or he can exercise his remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Apeejay School Vs. Sh. Darbari Lal & Ors. 170(2010) DLT 608. Sh. Ramphal did exercise his option to proceed under the Act and that too for limited relief. In those proceedings an exhaustive compromise was arrived at. Therefore, in my opinion, once limited dues are claimed, an all encompassing compromise is arrived at, that compromise is not challenged before the appropriate authority, then, neither Sh. Ramphal, and much less his legal heirs thereafter can claim that monetary dues and that too for the entire service period be now paid to the petitioners.