Central Government Industrial Tribunal

ID No. 245/2024 titled as Sh. Mahesh Jaiswal vs Delhi Cantonment Board on 19 December 2025

THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

CUM LABOUR COURT DELHI - 1,

NEW DELHI.

ID No.245/2024

Shri Mahesh Jaiswal, Secretary, National Front of Indian Trade Union, H.No.

1/109, Sadar Bazar, Delhi Cantt. New Delhi-110010.

…Claimant

Versus

The Chief Executive Officer, Through its Management of Delhi Cantonment Board, Sadar Bazar Road, Delhi-110010.

…Management

AWARD

1. In the present case, a reference was received from the appropriate Government vide letter No-ND-25/I-55/2024-IR dated 23.08.2024 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, for adjudication of a dispute, terms of which are as under: The Schedule ‘Whether the demand of claimant Shri Mahesh Jaiswal through National Front of Indian Trade Union against the management of Delhi Cantonment Board to rescind the suspension period i.e. 19.08.2015 to Feb. 2017 and to release all the service benefits i.e. reduction of increment by two stages and remaining pay/allowances including arrears etc. with interest, is legal, jut and proper? If so, then for what relief the workman is entitled to and what directions are necessary in this respect?’

2. In the reference order, the appropriate Government commanded the parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents,

Page 1 of 2

list of reliance and witnesses with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to the opposite parties involved in the dispute. Despite directions so given, Claimant union opted not to file the claim statement with the Tribunal.

3. On receipt of the above reference, notice was sent to the workman as well as the managements. Neither the postal article sent to the claimant, referred above, was received back nor was it observed by the Tribunal that postal services remained unserved in the period, referred above. Therefore, every presumption lies in favor of the fact that the above notice was served upon the claimant. Despite service of the notice, claimant opted to abstain away from the proceedings. No claim statement was filed on his behalf. Thus, it is clear that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the reference on merits.

4. Since the workman has neither put in his appearance nor he led any evidence so as to prove his cause against the management, this Tribunal is left with no choice, except to pass a ‘No Dispute/Claim’ award. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.

Date: 19.12.2025

ATUL KUMAR GARG

Presiding Officer

CGIT – cum – Labour Court – I

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead