SUNDER LAL RAJ KUMAR Vs. MURARI LAL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issues of fact and law, arising in these two writ petitions, are cognate and, to an extent, common, involving consideration of the same legal issues and leading to the same conclusion. They are, therefore, being decided by this common judgement. In order to facilitate an easier appreciation of the controversy, however, I would be deciding the issues arising for controversy in the context of WP (C) 6748/2013 (M/s Sunder Lal Raj Kumar v. Murali Lal Gupta), and applying, later in this judgement, the said decision to the facts in WP (C) 6749/2013 (M/s Sunder Lal Raj Kumar v. Balram Kansal).

(2.) The issues of law involved in these petitions admit of no legal complexity whatsoever. They are trite, and well settled; this judgement merely augments the pantheon of judicial authority that applies these principles. WP (C) 6478/2013 (M/s Sunder Lal Raj Kumar v. Murali Lal Gupta)

(3.) Proceeding, now, to the facts, arising in WP (C) 6478/2013 (M/s Sunder Lal Raj Kumar v. Murali Lal Gupta). For ease of reference, the respondents in these two writ petitions, i.e. Murari Lal Gupta and Balram Kansal, shall each be referred to as "the workman", while dealing with their cases.