RAM KRISHAN Vs. D D A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing.

(2.) This writ petition challenges the interim order dated 4th August, 2003 passed by the Industrial Tribunal No. 1, declining the interim relief to the petitioners for payment of wages. This case discloses an unfortunate state of affairs. The petitioners are 11 employees/beldars out of 144 beldars employed by the DDA at Rohini who were transferred on 1st December, 1994 by the respondent No. 1/DDA to the respondent No. 2/MCD. Thereafter, there was some dispute between the parties whether the transfer by DDA to MCD could have been effected or not. On 14th February, 1995, the petitioners served a legal demand notice upon respondent Nos. 1 and 2, on the ground that their redesignation was unfair, arbitrary and illegal. But, the respondents failed to positively respond to the same. Therefore, on 13th March, 1995, the petitioners filed a writ petition being CWP NO. 826/1995 before this Court which was dismissed on 5th February, 1998 as it was stated to involve disputed questions of fact. However, the petitioners were given the right to raise an industrial dispute. Which dispute is presently awaiting adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal. Eventually, it was accepted that the petitioners were beldars working with the MCD in the Conservancy Sanitation & Engineering (C.S.E.) Department. There was a dispute between the parties owing to the beldars in DDA such as the petitioners being made to work as the Safai Karamcharis. Eventually that matter was sorted out as reflected in the letter dated 3rd March, 1999 issued by the Director (Estt.), DDA to the Addl. Commissioner, MCD, Delhi, which reads as under:-

(3.) This stand taken in the letter of Director (Estt.) has also been followed by the order dated 9th January, 2002 of Secretary (Labour), in which the term of reference at the instance of the petitioner was as follows :-