Delhi District Court Labour Court No.1 : Room No. 52 : ... vs 2.1999 Vide Resignation Letter Ext. ... on 27 February, 2007 :1: I.D. No. 202/00. IN THE COURT OF SH. GURDEEP KUMAR: PRESIDING OFFICER: LABOUR COURT NO.1 : ROOM NO. 52 : KARKARDOOMA : DELHI. BETWEEN M/s. K. C. Electricals, B7, Jhilmil Industrial Area, Delhi95. AND Its workman Sh. Shiv Narayan, C/o Engineering Workers Lal Jhanda Union, B1/A, Nathu Colony (East), Shahdara, Delhi 93. AWARD : Vide Notification No. F. 24 (537)/ 2000 Lab. / 3205 209 dated 29.03.2000, Secretary Labour, Delhi Administration, Delhi has referred this dispute to this court for its adjudication u/s 10 (1)(c) and 12 (5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The terms of reference are as under : ''Whether the services of Sh. Shiv Narayan have been terminated illegally and / or unjustifiably by the management, and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?'' Workman's case in brief is that he had been in the employment of the management for the last three years on the post of Helper and his last drawn wages were Rs. 1,937/ Contd.. :2: I.D. No. 202/00. per month. He had been performing his duties with sincerity, diligence, devotion and dedication. He had uninterrupted, unblemished and meritorious service record and he never gave any cause of complaint to the management. However, the management did not issue him appointment letter nor it was maintaining any service record. It is further averred that management was engaged in anti labour practices and they were not providing legitimate facilities such as weekly offs, leave with pay, medical / ESI facilities etc. as per Government notifications nor it was paying even the minimum wages as prescribed by the Government from time to time. He became a member of the union in order that his interest may be protected and his grievances could be taken up with the management for effective redressal. This act of the workman incurred displeasure of the management. The management did not pay him earned wages for the month of June, 1999. When he demanded the same it incurred displeasure of the management. The management called Contd.. :3: I.D. No. 202/00. him in their office, gave him beating and procured his thumb impressions on blank papers and vouchers under coercion and threat on 02.07.1999 and also removed him from his services. He lodged a complaint to the S.H.O, Police Station Dilshad Garden on the same date i.e. 02.07.1999. 2. It is further averred that termination of his services by the management is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 because he was neither served any notice nor was paid one month's wages in lieu of notice nor was paid compensation. He was not even chargesheeted nor any domestic enquiry was initiated by the management. He challenged termination of his services by sending a demand notice dated 13.09.1999. The management, in their reply dated 17.09.1999 interalia that he had absented himself from duty unauthorizedly from 24.02.1999; that he went to the factory on 01.07.1999 and tendered his resignation from the services Contd.. :4: I.D. No. 202/00. which was accepted on that very day and that his account was settled on 02.07.1999. He sent a reply dated 27.09.1999 to the said notice to his demand notice wherein he rebutted contents of the management reply. A complaint was filed before the Assistant Labour Commissioner on 04.07.1999. He also filed Statement of Claim before the Conciliation Officer on 04.10.1999. The management appeared before the Conciliation Officer on one or two hearing and thereafter avoided to appear and hence the conciliation proceedings did not yield positive result. It is further averred that despite his best efforts he is unemployed throughout from the date his services have been terminated by the management. He has sought his reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. 3. The management has filed a Written Statement denying that the workman was employed with them for a pe