Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2001 DAILYLAW 1837 (DEL)

MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE v. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

W.P.(C)/12/2001 · 2026-08-05

Amit Mahajan

Writ Petition (Civil)body2001

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.(C) 12/2001 $~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010189832001 + W.P.(C) 12/2001 MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raj Birbal, Sr. Adv. (through VC) with Ms. Raavi Birbal, Adv. versus PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. I.S. Dahiya with Ms. Shashi, Advs. for R3 to R5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R % 05.08.2026 1. The present petition is filed essentially challenging the award dated 11.11.1999 (hereafter ‘impugned award’) passed by the learned Labour Court in I.D. No. 668/1991. 2. Briefly stated, the respondent workmen had joined the petitioner Management in capacity of a ‘Helper’ in May, 1990. Thereafter, Respondent Nos.3 and 5 were terminated on 29.12.1990 while Respondent No.4 was terminated on 05.01.1991. Finding that services of the respondent workmen were terminated while workers purportedly junior to them were retained in service without recording any objective satisfaction for such action, the learned Labour Court granted relief of reinstatement with full back wages along with continuity of service to Respondent Nos. 3 to 5. 3. Having perused the petition, I see no reason to interfere with the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/08/2026 at 12:31:32 W.P.(C) 12/2001 findings in the impugned award qua illegal termination at this stage after more than 26 years have passed since the passing of the impugned award, especially considering that the respondent workmen were terminated more than 36 years back. The matter in the opinion of this Court has lost significance with efflux of time. 4. At the same time, it cannot be ignored that the respondent workmen concededly have not worked for more than 7-8 months respectively and reinstatement was ordered vide impugned award almost 9 years after termination of the workmen. Ideally, monetary compensation ought to be ordered in lieu of reinstatement if much time has lapsed since termination so as to render reinstatement impractical. In such circumstances, considering the short spell of service of the workmen and lapse of time, the relief of reinstatement along with back wages appears to be ipso facto inequitable and interests of justice will be met if the same is substituted with monetary compensation. 5. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, pertinently, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court way back on 27.02.2004 under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the respondent workmen have received a substantial amount as subsistence allowance from the last more than 25 years without contributing in any manner to the work of the management. Though the said allowance is not inherently in the nature of compensation, it would be apposite in the peculiar facts of the present case if the amount so disbursed under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 be treated as part of the lump-sum compensation. 6. Further, considering the prolonged tribulations of litigation suffered by the respondent workmen, the amount lying deposited with This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/08/2026 at 12:31:32 W.P.(C) 12/2001 the Registry of this Court in terms of order dated 04.01.2001 (whereby this Court had directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the back wages) is also directed to be released in their favour as compensation along with any accrued interest within a period of four weeks. 7. It is made clear that all questions of law are left open. 8. The relief in the impugned award is modified in the aforesaid terms and the present petition is disposed of. AMIT MAHAJAN, J AUGUST 5, 2026 “SS” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/08/2026 at 12:31:32