JUDGMENT :

SATISH CHANDRA SHAMAR, J.

1. Aggrieved by an Order dated 04.08.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in CM APPL.32749/2022 of W.P.(C) 4471/2021, allowing the application filed by Respondent No.2/workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, the instant LPA has been filed.

2. It is stated that Respondent No.2/workman was employed with the Appellant at the post of Pressman from 21.11.2011. It is stated that the services of the workman was terminated on 05.08.2015 by the Appellant.

3. Challenging his termination, which according to the workman was without serving any notice and without payment of salary, the workman approached the Labour Commissioner. It is stated that conciliation proceedings failed and the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Delhi exercising his powers under Section 10 (1) (c) and 12 (5) of the Industrial Disputes Act referred the following questions for adjudication:-

"Whether Sh. Jawahar Lal S/o Sh. Bhagwan Das is absenting from duties without any information or his services 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"?

4. The Labour Court passed an Award dated 15.02.2020 directing reinstatement of the workman with full backwages along with continuity of service with all consequential benefits except for a period of 10 months.

5. The Award has been challenged by the Appellant by filing W.P.(C) 4471/2021. During the pendency of the writ petition, the workman filed an application bearing CM APPL.32749/2022 under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming full wages pending proceedings in the High Court stating that he has remained unemployed from the date of termination from the service and that he is not gainfully employed, neither is he engaged in any vocation. An affidavit affirming the same has also been filed along with application under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act.

6. The material on record discloses that the application under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act was filed on 31.08.2021 and the said application was opposed by the Appellant contending that the application has been filed belatedly without there being any proper explanation for the unreasonable delay.

7. The learned Single Judge by the order impugned herein allowed the application under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The said order has been challenged by the Appellant/management.

8. Ms. Anushree Malviya, learned Counsel for the Appellant, contends that the averments made by the workman in the application do not satisfy the requirements of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act. She further contends that the application was filed with considerable delay and there was no proper explanation given for the delay. It is also contended that the management had requested and had made several offers the workman to join the services but Respondent No.2/workman did not join.

9. Learned Counsel for the Appellant relies on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors. v. Santosh Kumari & Ors., MANU/DE/4960/2012 and drawn the attention of this Court to Paragraph 26 of the said judgment, relevant portion of which reads as under:-

“26. We are of the considered view that the Single Bench in Food Craft Instt. (supra) gave a balanced interpretation to the aforesaid provision taking into consideration the interest of both the workman as well as the employer. It is the most equitable. What follows from a conjoint reading of Para (xii) and (xvi) enumerated therein that normally, the workman would be paid wages with effect from the date of the award. It should be in those cases where application is filed with promptitude and immediately on notice of writ petition staying the operation of the order of reinstatement or proceedings against such an award. It should be within reasonable period. Thereafter, that would mean that such an application should normally be fi