SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 3888

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SAURABH BANERJEE
Delhi Transport Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Baleshwar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Ms. Manisha Tyagi and Ms. Damini Vishwakarma, Advocates, for the Appellant.
None, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. The present Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) arises out of an order dated 18.04.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C.) No. 8058/2010. The learned Single Judge has upheld the award dated 31.03.2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal II, Karkardooma Court, New Delhi in I.D. No. 18/2002 wherein the Tribunal has directed the Appellant management to, inter alia, reinstate the Respondent workman with 40% back wages.

2. The Appellant/Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) has prayed for setting aside of the judgment dated 18.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge as well the award passed by the Tribunal dated 31.03.2010.

3. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the Respondent workman joined the services of DTC as a conductor on 20.04.1983 and his services were regularized on 20.10.1983. On 05.08.1992, the checking staff of the DTC inspected a bus bearing number 6097 on route from Faridabad to Delhi and the checking staff, and while conducting routine check found that the Respondent workman failed to issue a ticket to one passenger, namely Mr. Vijay Pal after collecting the requisite charges i.e. Rs.2/-. The che

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top