$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010518042019 + W.P.(C) 1028/2020 ICICI PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Arvind Minocha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sachin Daga, Mr. Rajesh Kandari, Mr. Yogesh Yadav, Advocates. versus SHRI YOGENDER NAGAR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mohak Bhadana, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 25.09.2026 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner/management has assailed the Award dated 02.07.2019 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, New Delhi in I.D. No.96/2013, whereby the learned court held the termination of the respondent/workman w.e.f. 24.08.2009 to be illegal and unjustified and directed his reinstatement in service on the last pay drawn, along with back wages from 24.08.2009 till reinstatement and consequential service benefits, including continuity of service. 2. The respondent was appointed by the petitioner as a Unit Manager in Grade-I along with other admissible allowances. The dispute was thereafter referred by the Central Government under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication of the following reference: “Whether the action of the management of M/s. ICICI Prudential 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 05/10/2026 at 11:02:38 Life Insurance Company Ltd. in terminating the services of Shri Yogender Nagar w.e.f. 24.08.2009 is legal and justified? What relief the workman is entitled to?” 3. It is well settled that reinstatement with back wages does not follow as an automatic consequence of a finding that the termination is illegal or unjustified. The relief is required to be moulded having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. In Jagbir Singh v. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board1, the Supreme Court recognised that compensation in lieu of reinstatement may, in appropriate circumstances, meet the ends of justice. Similarly, in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Bhurumal2, the Supreme Court reiterated that reinstatement, particularly after a long lapse of time, is not an automatic consequence of an illegal termination and that monetary compensation may appropriately be awarded in lieu thereof. 4. The Supreme Court has also emphasised that while moulding the relief, the Court is required to take into account the relevant circumstances, including the nature and length of service, the circumstances of termination and the passage of time. Thus, the relief of compensation may be considered where, having regard to the circumstances prevailing at the stage when the matter is finally adjudicated, reinstatement would no longer be an appropriate or efficacious relief. 5. In the present case, keeping in view the fact that the respondent's services were terminated in August 2009, that the Award was passed in July 1 (2009) 15 SCC 327 2 (2014) 7 SCC 177 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 05/10/2026 at 11:02:38 2019 and that the matter has remained pending thereafter, this Court is of the view that at this stage compensation in lieu of reinstatement and the consequential reliefs granted under the Award would constitute a just and fair mode of bringing the dispute to an end. 6. As regards the quantum, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions and as a one-time measure, has offered a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- over and above the amount already lying deposited with the Registrar General of this Court. Having regard to the long period for which the respondent has remained out of service, the nature of the relief originally granted by the learned Tribunal, the passage of time during which the present proceedings have remained pending, and the fact that the aforesaid amount is being offered in addition to the amount already deposited before this Court, this Court considers the said amount to be a reasonable and fair compensation for the purposes of settling the respondent's claim for reinstatement and consequential monetary reliefs at this stage. 7. In view of the aforesaid submission, the amount lying deposited with the Registrar General of this Court, along with the interest accrued thereon, be released in favour of the respondent within a period of four weeks from today. 8. The petitioner shall further pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, as undertaken, to the respondent within a period of six weeks from today. For this purpose, the respondent shall furnish his bank details to the petitioner within one week from today. 9. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 25, 2026/rd 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 05/10/2026 at 11:02:38