Central Government Industrial Tribunal
Smt. Prem vs DDA & Anr on 7 July 2025
BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDSUTRIAL TRIBUNAL – CUM –
LABOUR COURT-II, NEW DELHI
I.D. NO. 14/2021
Smt. Prem, W/o Sh. Ranjeet,
R/o House No. H-114, JJ Colony, Wazirpur, Delhi-110052.
VERSUS
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The Dy. Chairman, DDA, DDA Head Qrts, 4- Mahatma Gandhi Marg, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002.
2. Gayatri Webtech Pvt. Ltd., SF-02, One Mart Mall, Sector-6, Vashundhra, Vaishali, Ghaziabad-201019.
AWARD
1. This is an application U/s 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act (here in after is referred as an Act) filed by the claimant stating that she was working with the management-1 through M-2 who is a contractor since 01.04.2014 as a Sweeper and her last drawn salary was Rs. 8,000/- per month. Management no. 2 had deployed the workman at the premises of the management no. 1 situated at Major Dhyan Chand Sports Complex, F- 140, Block-F, JJ Colony, Wazirpur, Ashok Vihar, Delhi-110052. She did her work well and has not given any chance of making any complaint to the management nor was she charged while she was in service. Management did not provide any legal facility i.e. appointment letter, attendance register, leave book, wages slip, bonus, ESI, P.F., minimum wages etc. Management used to take work from her in overtime but she was not paid overtime wages. When the workman demanded for said legal benefits, management had terminated her services illegally on 11.12.2018. Thereafter, workman filed a case before conciliation officer, on 15.04.2019, management no. 2 appeared and compromise that he would reinstate the workman. She was taken back on duty. After taking back on job, she again demanded for the legal facilities which annoyed the managements. In vengeance of the demands raised by the workman, without giving any reason and prior notice to her, she was terminated by the management on 01.08.2019 which is illegal. Thereafter, she kept on regularly visiting the management’s establishments and requested the managements to take her back on duty and to permit her duty and pay her due wages, but, the managements were adamant not to take her back on duty. She had also sent a demand letter dated 20.08.2019 to the managements through the labour union by speed post which had been served to the managements, however, despite service of the demand letter, managements had not paid any heed to the same. She had gone to the conciliation, but it was resulted into failure. Hence, she filed the present claim with the prayer that he be reinstated with full back wages.
2. M-1 has filed its WS denying the averment made in the claim statement of the claimant. He also submitted that claim of the claimant is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed as he was never employed of M-1, he was the employee of M-2.
3. M-2 was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 09.11.2021.
4. Examination in chief of the workman has been recorded. Thereafter, neither the workman nor her AR has been appearing since long to substantiate her claim, inspite of providing a number of opportunities.
7. In these circumstances, when the claimant is not interested in perusing her case, this tribunal has no option but to dismiss her claim. Hence, her claim stands dismissed. Award is passed accordingly. A copy of this award is sent to appropriate government for notification under section 17 of the I.D. Act. File is consigned to record room.
ATUL KUMAR GARG Date: 07.07.2025
Presiding Officer
CGIT-cum-Labour Court-II