Back
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SANJEEV NARULA
Santosh Devi – Appellant
Versus
Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital Shahdara Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. presentation of case and procedural history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments made by appellant's counsel regarding employment. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's findings and reasoning. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 4. interpretation of id act and section 240 days employment requirement. (Para 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 5. final dismissal of appeal. (Para 80) |
JUDGMENT
Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) is arising out of the judgment dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P.(C.) No.13869/2004 titled Smt. Santosh Devi Vs. Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital Shahdara, Delhi. Vide impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has upheld the Award dated 08.07.2003 passed by the Labour Court-I, Karkardooma, Delhi in I.D. No.308/1998 titled as "The Management of M/s Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital Vs. Its Workman Smt. Santosh Devi".
2. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appellant before this Court was engaged as a daily wager in the services of Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Shahdara, Delhi (GTB Hospital) as a Safai Karamchari on muster roll w.e.f. 17.12.1988. As per the st
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
