2023:DHC:7511

-1-

$-

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

BEFORE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

+

W.P.(C) 3592/2020 and CM APPL. 12782/2020

Between: -

N.T.P.C LTD

DADRI, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR,

U.P.

(THROUGH MR NIKESH KUMAR,

SR. MANAGER)

..... PETITIONER

AND

SH.SURAJ PAL SINGH

S/O SH HANSRAJ,

DISTRICT HAPPUR,

U.P

..... RESPONDENT

+

W.P.(C) 9539/2020

SURAJPAL SINGH

S/O SHRI HANSRAJ SINGH

HOUSE NO. 200, VPO GALAND,

DISTRICT HAPUR, UTTAR PRADESH

..... PETITIONER

Digitally Signed

By:PURUSHAINDRA

KUMAR KAURAV

Signature Not Verified

- 2 -

AND

THE GENERAL MANAGER

NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION (NTPC)

DADRI, GAUTAM BUDHA NAGAR,

UTTAR PRADESH

..... RESPONDENT

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

%

Pronounced on: 12.10.2023

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

J U D G M E N T

1.

The present petitions have been filed by the Management/NTPC

Ltd. and the workman-Sh. Surajpal Singh respectively, challenging the

award dated 13.08.2019 passed by the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal-II (hereinafter referred to as 'the Labour Court'), whereby,

the claim of the workman has been allowed to the extent of directing

the Management to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation

for his illegal termination. The Management has challenged the award

on the ground that the Labour Court has erroneously held that the

workman was an employee of the Management while the workman

has challenged the award on the ground that he has only been granted

compensation in lieu of reinstatement with back wages.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the Management submits that the

impugned award is perverse in law and has been passed without

appreciating the evidence produced by the parties. He submits that

there does not exist any employer-employee relationship between the

parties as the workman was a contractual workman who was working

Digitally Signed

By:PURUSHAINDRA

KUMAR KAURAV

Signature Not Verified

- 3 -

as Operator-cum-Watchman with M/s Alankar Nursery & Farms

w.e.f. 01.01.1993 that was awarded the Contract of 'Operation and

Maintenance of Water Supply and Sewerage Disposal Pumps' by the

Management.

3.

Learned counsel for the Management further submits that the

onus of proving that an employer-employee relationship existed

between the parties lies on the workman and in the present case, he

has failed to discharge that burden. He states that the workman has not

submitted any evidence to prove that he was appointed by the

Management and the manner in which the appointment, if any, was

done. Moreover, nothing has been brought on record to show that he

was paid any salary by the Management.

4.

Learned counsel for the Management has also emphasized the

fact that it being a Public Sector Undertaking, it is highly unbelievable

that a workman could have been appointed without there being proper

documentation of the hiring process or an interview letter. Moreover,

the workman had himself admitted during cross-examination that he

was never issued any official interview letter or any salary slip

throughout his employment period. Therefore, the workman has failed

to prove that he completed 240 days of continuous work. Learned

counsel has relied upon Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation v. Jadeja

Govubha Chhanubha¹, andManager, Reserve Bank of India,

Bangalore v. S. Mani²to assert that in order to claim that termination

has been illegal on account of non-payment of retrenchment

compensation, the onus is on the workman to prove that he was in

continuous service for 240 days and in the present case, the workman

has failed to do so.

1 (2014) 16 SCC 130

2 (2005) 5 SCC 100

Digitally Signed

By:PURUSHAINDRA

KUMAR KAURAV

Signature Not Verified

- 4 -

5.

Learned counsel further submits that the Management had

produced do