Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Wearwell (India) Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Shambhu Prasad - Respondent
W.P.(C) 8614 of 2022
Decided On : 30-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. final conclusion: petition allowed, order set aside. (Para 1 , 6) |
| 2. challenging the impugned order under the payment of wages act. (Para 2) |
| 3. prior similar cases and orders challenged. (Para 3) |
| 4. judgment based on parity with previous orders. (Para 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CM APPL.25916/2022 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
WP(C) 8614/2022 & CM APPL.25915/2022 (for stay)
2. The present petition has been filed against the order dated 07.08.2020, passed by the District & Sessions Judge, South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi in RCA No.60/2019 in appeal under Section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
3. The impugned order dated 07.08.2020 had also been challenged in the W.P.(C) 3373/2021 tiled M/s. Wearell (India) Private Limited vs. Manoj Kumar and WP(C) 3398/2021 titled M/s. Wearwell (India) Private Limited vs. Arun Kumar; WP(C) 2105/2022 titled Wearwell (India) Private Limited v. Dharmender Kumar Tanti; WP(C) 2034/2022 tiled Private Limited v. Mohd. Nizam; W.P.(C) 2106 titled Wearwell (India) Private Limited vs. Umesh Shah; WP(C) 2184 titled Wearwell (India) Private Limited vs. Raju; WP(C) 2180/2022 titled Wearwell (India) Private Limited vs. Praveen Kumar, vide which the impugned order dated 07.08.2020 was set aside.
4. This Court vide order dated 21.03.2022 in W.P.(C) 3373/2021 tiled M/s. Wearell (India) Private Limited vs. Manoj Kumar, held as under-
"4. For parity of reasons, this writ petitions are also allowed. The impugned orders dated August 7, 2020 are set aside."
5. In view of the above judgments, on reasons of parity, present writ petition is also allowed. The impugned order dated 07.08.2020 is set aside.
6. Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of.
AI
The court emphasized the importance of consistency in legal decisions across similar cases, allowing a petition to set aside a previous order based on established precedents.
The jurisdiction of the writ court is not for appellate review of Labour Court decisions; it must ensure there is no illegality or perversity in the lower court's order while affirming the duty to pa....
Orders passed by the appellate authority under the Payment of Wages Act are subject to revision under Article 227 of the Constitution, not Article 226.
The Deputy Labour Commissioner's order was void as it lacked jurisdiction to award wages to a supplier of labor without identifying specific employees under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
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
