Under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, a workman reinstated by court order is entitled to full wages pending appeal if he proves unemployment.

JUDGMENT

Talwant Singh, J.:

CM APPL. 25761/2020

1. This application has been moved on behalf of the respondent no. 1 - workman under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to `the Act') read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short `CPC') praying as under:

"a. Direct the Appellant to pay full wages last drawn inclusive of maintenance allowance or minimum wages fixed and revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act Whichever is higher w.e.f. 28;05.2007 to till the final disposal of present Appeal."

2. It has been mentioned by the applicant/respondent no. 1 in his application that the present appeal was preferred by the appellant- Corporation/ North Delhi Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as NrDMC) against judgement dated 18.02.2020 passed in W.P. (C.) 7811/2008 by which the learned Single Judge was pleased to set aside the award dated 28.05.2007 passed by the Labour Court in ID No. 645/2006 and vide said order dated 18.02.2020, the learned Single Judge had granted regularization to the workman with 30% back wages and continuity of service for all purposes.

3. The opening paragraph of the award dated 28.05.2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court no. XVI, defining the terms of reference is reproduced here under:

"Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi through its Sect. (Labour) vide reference No. F.24(4815)/02/Lab. 6160-64 dated 24.03.03, referred the dispute for adjudication between the management of M/s. M.C.D. and its workman Sh. Bal Kishan in the following terms of reference:

`Whether the services of Sh. Bal Kishan S/0 Sh. Nathu Ram R/o House No. 112, Village Dhaka, Delhi have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what sum of money as monetary relief along with consequential benefit in terms of existing laws/Government notification and to what other relief is he are they entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?"

4. The labour court had dismissed the claim of the workman but the learned Single Judge has set aside the award and granted re-instatement with regularisation but the NrDMC, instead of implementing the said judgment has challenged the same before the Division Bench. So, the applicant- workman moved this application under Section 17B of the Act praying for payment of full back wages last drawn or minimum wages, whichever is higher, inclusive of any maintenance allowance as per provision of Section 17B of the Act.

5. It has been specifically stated that the respondent no. 1-workman is not gainfully employed in any establishment from the date of the award dated 28.05.2007 till date. The averments in the application are duly supported by an affidavit of the workman and in the affidavit itself, it has been reiterated that the applicant/respondent no. 1 is not employed in any establishment after passing of the award till date.

6. Notice was issued. The NrDMC has filed a joint reply to all the pending applications including the present application on 22.01.2021. The reply to the present application starts from paragraph 16 of the said joint reply. The submission of the NrDMC is that even before the learned Single Judge, it had made the submission that the workman was gainfully employed elsewhere but it was difficult to know the exact whereabouts of the work/job done by the respondent no. 1. Hence, proof could not be obtained. The workman left the services of the NrDMC in the year 2000 and he was around 27 years of age at that time and it is difficult to accept that such an able-bodied person was sitting at