W.P.(C)/2012/2016 of KHANDELWAL HOSPITAL & UROLOGY CENTRE Vs GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS on 27 July 2026

O R D E R

%

27.07.2026

1. Through the present writ petition, the petitioner prays as under : “A. Issued a writ, order or direction of certiorari quashing the ex-parte Order dated 29.5.2015 issued by the respondent no. 2, Shri Gurmukh Singh, Commissioner, Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, Government of NCT of Delhi, Vishwakarma Nagar, Jhilmil Colony, Delhi-110 095 thereby directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 85,130/- by way of demand draft in favor of “Commissioner, Employee’s Compensation, District East” along-with simple interest @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. 5.2.2014 on the amount of compensation within one month from the issuance of this order; and B. In the alternatively direction may kindly be given to the respondent no. 2 for setting aside of order dated 9.12.2015, and allow the petitioner to defend the claim petition on merit; and C. Issued such further appropriate writ / order / direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The petitioner essentially challenges the impugned orders dated 29.05.2015 and 09.12.2015, passed by learned Commissioner under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.

3. By the impugned order dated 29.05.2015, learned Commissioner had allowed the claim application filed by Respondent No. 3 under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 and had directed the petitioner to pay a sum of ₹85,130/-.

4. The petitioner, claiming that the said order was passed ex parte, filed an application seeking recall, which was dismissed by the impugned order dated 09.12.2015 noting that the A.R. of the petitioner had admitted to have received the summons and therefore, the non- appearance was advertent.

5. The petitioner claims that they had never received the summons and submits that since Respondent No. 3 had also initiated the proceedings before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, the possibility of mix-up of summons could not be ruled out.

6. This Court, by order dated 09.03.2016, on the petitioner depositing a sum of ₹85,130/- with the Registrar General of this Court, had stayed the operation of the impugned orders.

7. None has been appearing for Respondent No. 3 despite being served through all modes including through publication.

8. In the absence of any reply, the averments made by the petitioner in the present writ petition are considered to be admitted. Even otherwise, the petitioner diligently filed an application seeking recall and had also approached this Court without wasting much time. In order to show his bona fide, a sum of ₹85,130/- had also been deposited.

9. Thus, this Court considers it apposite to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to represent its case before the learned Commissioner under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.

10. In view of the above, the impugned orders dated 29.05.2015 and 09.12.2015 are set aside and the learned Commissioner under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 is directed to decide the complaint filed by Respondent No. 3 afresh, after giving an opportunity to the parties.

11. The amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 09.03.2016 with the Registrar General of this Court along with all accrued interest, is directed to be remitted to the learned Commissioner under Employees Compensation Act, 1923, for further orders.

12. The present order be communicated to the concerned Authorities through the learned Secretary, Department of Labour for further proceedings.

13. The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. AMIT MAHAJAN, J JULY 27, 2026 ‘KDK’