Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2007 DAILYLAW 2631 (DEL)

DTC v. MURTI DEVI

2007-10-10

Hima Kohli

body2007
HIMA KOHLI, J. ( 1 ) COUNSEL for the respondent states that he does not wish to file any counter affidavit in WP (C) No. 512/2006 and that the stand taken by the respondent/ workman in WP (C) No. 15220/2004 filed by him, may be adopted for the purposes of deciding the present writ petition. Permission is granted. ( 2 ) RULE. ( 3 ) WITH the consent of the parties, both the matters are being heard and disposed of finally. WP (C) No. 512/2006 has been filed by the DTC against the award dated 14. 1. 2003 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in I. D. No. 157/1999 and WP (C) No. 15220/2004 has been filed by the workman for implementation of the award. ( 4 ) TO decide both the cases, the facts of WP (C) No. 512/2006 are taken note of. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the deceased workman, Shri Rajpal was employed with the petitioner/dtc as Driver w. e. f. 23. 5. 1977. On 9. 7. 1998, the DTC Medical Board declared the respondent/ workman unfit for duty. Vide order dated 24. 7. 1998, Shri Rajpal was retired prematurely from the services of the DTC/corporation under the DRTA Regulations. Upon being retired, the respondent/ workman raised a dispute, which was referred by the appropriate authority for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. The terms of reference were as below : "whether the premature retirement of Sh. Rajpal is illegal and or unjustified and if So to what relief is he entitled and what Directions are necessary in this respect"" ( 5 ) AFTER hearing the parties on both the sides and taking into consideration the material placed on record, the Industrial Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the premature retirement of the workman Shri Rajpal was unjustified and he was held entitled to compensation equal to two months salary at the time of his retirement (i. e. Rs. 7000/- per month) x the number of years of service i. e. , 21 years which as per the award came to Rs. 2,94,000/-, in addition to all usual retiral benefits. 7000/- per month) x the number of years of service i. e. , 21 years which as per the award came to Rs. 2,94,000/-, in addition to all usual retiral benefits. ( 6 ) COUNSEL for the petitioner states that there is an error on the face of the record inasmuch as while passing the award, the Industrial Tribunal while relying on a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Anand bihari Versus Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur reported at air 1991 SC 1003 particularly, para 12 thereof, erroneously calculated the amount payable to the respondent/ workman by way of compensation on the basis of number of years of service rendered, instead of computing the amount on the basis of remaining years of service as directed by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgment. ( 7 ) THE aforesaid legal position is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. The whole issue hinges only on the judgment of the supreme Court in the case of Anand Bihari (supra ). The Supreme Court while directing the respondent/ Corporation therein to formulate a scheme, had observed as below:- ". . . . . . . . Bearing in mind all the aforesaid factors, we direct the corporation as follows:- (I) The corporation shall in addition to giving each of the retired workmen his retirement benefits, offer him any other alternative job which may be available and which he is eligible to perform. . . . . . . . Bearing in mind all the aforesaid factors, we direct the corporation as follows:- (I) The corporation shall in addition to giving each of the retired workmen his retirement benefits, offer him any other alternative job which may be available and which he is eligible to perform. (ii) In case no alternative job is available, each of the workmen shall be paid alongwith his retirement benefits, an additional compensatory amount as follows : (a) Where the employee has put in 5 years or less than 5 years service, the amount of compensation shall be equivalent to 7 days salary per year of the balance of his service : (b) Where the employee has put in more than 5 years but less than 10 years service, the amount of compensation shall be equivalent to 15 days salary per year of the balance of his service : (c) Where the employee has put in more than 10 years service but less than 15 years service, the amount of compensation shall be equivalent to 21 days salary per year of the balance of his service : (d) Where the employee has put in more than 15 years service but less than 20 years service, the amount of compensation shall be equivalent to one month's salary per year of the balance of his service : (e) where the employee has put in more than 20 years service, the amount of compensation shall be equivalent to two month's salary per year of the balance of this service. The salary will mean the total monthly emoluments that the workman was drawing on the date of his retirement. (iii) If the alternative job is not available at a later date, the Corporation may offer it to the workman provided he refunds the proportionate compensatory amount. (iv) The option to accept either of the two corporation, shall be that of the workman. " (emphasis added) ( 8 ) IN view of the aforementioned admitted position, the impugned award dated 14. 1. 2003, is modified. It is held that the respondent/ workman (since deceased) is entitled to compensation equal to two months salary at the time of his retirement (i. e. Rs. 7000/- per month) x the number of balance years of service, in addition to all the usual retiral benefits. 1. 2003, is modified. It is held that the respondent/ workman (since deceased) is entitled to compensation equal to two months salary at the time of his retirement (i. e. Rs. 7000/- per month) x the number of balance years of service, in addition to all the usual retiral benefits. ( 9 ) IT is pertinent to note that an order dated 4. 10. 2005 was passed in WP (C) No. 15220/2004, filed by the LRs of the deceased workman for seeking implementation of the aforesaid award, by which the DTC was directed to deposit the entire awarded amount in the Court within a period of three weeks. As a result, the DTC deposited a sum of Rs. 2,94,000/- vide cheque dated 2. 2. 2006. The Registry was further directed to release a sum of Rs. 1,16,166/-, the amount which according to the DTC, the respondent/workman would have been entitled to as compensation had the calculation been done on the basis of two months salary for each year, for the remaining period of service. It may be noted that while permission for release of the said amount was granted by this court as aforesaid and a repayment voucher for the said sum was prepared by the Registry as per office report dated 28. 02. 2006, the said amount has not been collected by the lrs of the respondent/workman. After preparation of the repayment voucher for rs. 1,16,166/-, the remaining amount of Rs. 1,77,834/- is stated to be lying as balance in the CCD account. In view of the fact that the impugned award as above is modified in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Anand Bihari (Supra), both the writ petitions are disposed of with directions to the petitioner/dtc to release the amount of compensation equivalent to two months salary per year for the balance period of service of the respondent/workman. ( 10 ) THE petitioner is directed to pay the aforesaid amount along with all usual retiral benefits to the respondent/workman through his LRs. The lrs of the deceased respondent/workman, shall be at liberty to submit to the petitioner/dtc `no Objection Certificates' along with requisite affidavits in favour of any one of the LRs to enable the petitioner/dtc to release the entire amount in favour of the said LR. It is also pertinent to note that while passing the order dated 4. The lrs of the deceased respondent/workman, shall be at liberty to submit to the petitioner/dtc `no Objection Certificates' along with requisite affidavits in favour of any one of the LRs to enable the petitioner/dtc to release the entire amount in favour of the said LR. It is also pertinent to note that while passing the order dated 4. 10. 2005 in WP (C) No. 15220/2004, the petitioner/dtc was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 7500/- to the respondent/workman, through counsel towards litigation expenses. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner/dtc that though a cheque of the said amount dated 01. 02. 2006, was duly prepared and forwarded to the counsel, but due to bona fide inadvertence, it was not handed over to the respondent/workman. Counsel for the petitioner is directed to have the said cheque revalidated and hand over the same to the counsel for the respondent/workman within three weeks from today. ( 11 ) IT is pertinent to note that while the award in question was passed on 14. 01. 2003, the petitioner/dtc has assailed the same by filing the present writ petition only on 03. 10. 2005. Thereafter, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 2,94,000/- in this Court in terms of the order dated 04. 10. 2005. It is therefore deemed appropriate that the petitioner/ DTC pay interest on the aforesaid amount @ 9 % p. a. to the respondent/workman from the date of the publication of the award till the date the said amount was deposited by the petitioner in the Registry i. e. till 06. 2. 2006. ( 12 ) THE petitioner is directed to recalculate the amount payable to the deceased respondent/workman by calculating the same on the basis of two months' salary for each year, for the balance period of service, in accordance with the directions passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Anand Bihari (supra ). The aforesaid amount shall be released to the deceased respondent/workman through his legal heirs, along with interest as directed in para 11 above, within a period of six weeks from today. The aforesaid payment shall be forwarded to them duly accompanied by a statement of account. The aforesaid amount shall be released to the deceased respondent/workman through his legal heirs, along with interest as directed in para 11 above, within a period of six weeks from today. The aforesaid payment shall be forwarded to them duly accompanied by a statement of account. Immediately upon release of the amount to the respondent/workman, through his legal heirs, and upon showing proof of receipt of payment, the petitioner/dtc shall be at liberty to withdraw the entire amount deposited by it in the registry in terms of the order dated 04. 10. 2005. ( 13 ) BOTH the writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid orders. No orders as to costs.