Sh. Anil Yadav vs University of Delhi & Anr on 9 September 2026

1. The Vice Chancellor, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007.

2. Ambedkar Ganguly Student House for women, University of Delhi, Hostel Complex, New Delhi-110009.

…Managements/respondents

Counsels: For Applicant/ Claimant: Sh. Ashok Kumar, Ld. AR.

For Management/ Respondent: Sh. Navneet Anand and Sh. Sahil Sharma, Ld. ARs.

Award 09.09.2026

I.D. No. 107/2019 09th September 2026 Present: Sh. Ashok Kumar, Ld. AR along with few of the claimants. Sh. Navneet Anand and Sh. Sahil Sharma, Ld. ARs for management (University of Delhi).

An application has been filed by the claimant seeking withdrawal of the present claim against the management as full and final settlement has been arrived at between him and the management of University of Delhi before the Mediation Centre, High Court of Delhi. He submitted that he does not want to pursue the case any further. Statement of the claimant has been recorded to this effect. Record perused. A reference had been sent to this Tribunal by the appropriate government in 2019 for adjudication in the following words: “whether the workman Shri Anil Yadav is entitled to the same salary and benefits at par with his regular counterparts for the period w.e.f. 21.08.2013 to 31.12.2015, i.e. when he served the management as caretaker on fixed term contract basis and if so, what relief the workman is entitled to and what directions are necessary in this regard?” After completion of pleadings, the following issues were framed in the present case vide order dated 31.10.2022:

1. Whether the proceeding is maintainable.

2. Whether the claimant was a contractual and fixed term employee.

3. Whether the claimant is entitled to equal pay at par with the regular counterparts for the period 21.08.2013 to 31.12.2015 when he was working for the management.

4. To what other relief the claimant is entitled to. The Ld. AR for the management has placed on record a copy of award dated 27.08.2019 passed by CGIT-I, New Delhi, wherein, in lieu of the termination of service, the management was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the claimant. Considering the fact that the matter has now been settled between both parties, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this dispute alive. In view of the statement made by the claimant, the present claim stands dismissed as withdrawn. The record of the case I.D. No. 139/2016 (Sh. Anil Yadav v. University of Delhi), decided by CGIT-I, which was retained earlier, is directed to be returned. The award is passed accordingly. A copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government for notification under Section 17 of the I.D. Act. The file is consigned to the record room.

ATUL KUMAR GARG

Dated 09.09.2026

Presiding Officer

CGIT – cum – Labour Court – II