DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. KRISHAN PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed by the respondent/workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking direction to the petitioner to pay wages @ Rs. 7,500/- per month which is the revised scale last drawn by the applicant/respondent.

(2.) The respondent/applicant contended that the petitioner has challenged the award dated 23rd, August, 2003 passed by the Industrial Tribunal-I in I.D.No.109/2001 in the present writ petition under which the petitioner was directed to pay remaining back wages to the respondent. Another writ petition No.2372/2001was filed and the application of 17B under Industrial Disputes Act,1947 was allowed by the order dated 8th January,2003, and the petitioner was directed to pay the wages to the respondent but the payment of said wages was below the Minimum Wages and the respondent/applicant was not paid the wages in the scale lastly drawn by the respondent/applicant. The respondent/applicant, therefore, contended that he is entitled to revised last drawn wages @ Rs.7,500/-per month. The respondent also submitted that in W.P.C.2372/2001 the order dated 7th August, 2000 of the Industrial Tribunal was set-aside and the matter was remanded back for fresh adjudication. The respondent/applicant stated that the payment was stopped to him w.e.f. June 2007. The respondent stated that he has been unemployed and has not been working in any establishment anywhere, and his whole family is totally depend upon him. He asserted that due to his unemployment it is very difficult for him to support himself and his family members which consist of his disabled wife, old mother, three young daughters and two minor sons. The respondent prayed to allow this application otherwise the respondent/applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. An affidavit has also been filed by the respondent/ Sh. Krishna Pal, R/o Village and Post Dhanora Silver Nagar, District Bhagpat, U.P., presently at Delhi to this effect.

(3.) A reply has been filed on behalf of petitioner/non applicant that the application of the respondent/applicant is not maintainable as he has not shown that any efforts were made by him to secure a job. The petitioner contended that the respondent cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own lethargy. The petitioner/non-applicant denied the plea of the respondent that he is jobless from the date of his termination. It was admitted by the petitioner/management that the payment was stopped w.e.f. June 2007. The petitioner argued that the respondent was paid wages under section 17B in W.P.(C) 2372/2001 till May 2007 as per the court order dated 8th January, 2003. On 24th May 2007 the writ petition 2372/2001 was allowed and the order dated 7th August 2000 passed by the Industrial Tribunal was set aside and the case was remanded back to Tribunal for fresh adjudication. The petitioner/non-applicant pleaded that the application filed by the petitioner/Corporation under section 33(2) (b) is still pending before the Industrial Tribunal and the respondent/applicant is not entitled for relief under section 17B till the disposal of the case. The petitioner/non- applicant submitted that the application be dismissed as the applicant is not unemployed as it is very difficult for the respondent to survive with his family members for such a long period without any job.