ORDER

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)

1. The relevant facts necessary for the adjudication of the instant petition are as under:

a. The petitioner is Central Public Works Department, a central government department which had engaged the respondent no. 3/workman as a contractor to operate inlet and outlet valve of overhead tank on work order basis at a mutually agreed rate w.e.f. 1st March, 1988. b. The respondent no. 3 was awarded the first work order w.e.f. 1st March, 1998 to 30th September, 1988 @ Rs. 600/- per month. Thereafter, the workman continued to be awarded the same work on work order basis for different periods at different rates between the periods of 1st March, 1988 to 31st March, 1993. It is stated by the petitioner that the contract for work entered into with the respondent workman expired on 31st March, 1993.

c. Subsequently, the respondent workman applied for regularisation of his services before the petitioner management on 10th August, 1994, however, the same got denied.

d. Thereupon, the respondent workman preferred conciliation proceedings before the office of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) New Delhi, however, the same failed vide letter dated 10th January, 1997. Pursuant to which, the respondent workman filed an industrial dispute bearing ID No. 03/1998 before the learned Industrial Tribunal on 1st January, 1998.

e. The learned Industrial Tribunal ruled in favour of the respondent workman on 26th April, 2004, holding that the respondent workman was entitled to regularisation and reinstatement at the post of „peon – cum – waterman‟.

Moreover, the learned Industrial Tribunal also awarded the balance wages at par with the other regular employees of the corresponding category from 1st March, 1988.

f. Aggrieved by the above said award, the petitioner filed W.P. (C) No. 6535/2005 before this Court where this Court upheld the reinstatement and set aside the regularisation of the respondent workman vide order dated 20th April, 2007.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed LPA No. 1228/2007. In the said appeal, the workman filed an application bearing CM No.918/2008 under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter “the Act”)

which was allowed vide interim order dated 5th December, 2008 and the petitioner was directed to pay either the last drawn wages or the minimum wage for corresponding category (whichever higher) to the respondent workman for the period starting from the date of the award till the date of disposal of the appeal, and to clear the arrears owed to the respondent workman under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

g. Thereafter, the respondent workman filed a contempt petition bearing No. CAS (C) 326/2009 against the petitioner for non-compliance of the above said interim order. The Division Bench of this Court disposed of the said contempt petition vide order dated 27th April, 2009 wherein the petitioner‟s statement was recorded to the effect that the calculations furnished by the respondent workman were fallacious and that the petitioner would fully comply with the interim order.

h. In compliance with the interim order dated 5th December, 2008, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.2,13,805/- to the respondent workman towards the arrears w.e.f 26th April, 2004 to 30th April, 2009 and the same was calculated on the basis of minimum wages applicable for the post of “peon – cum – waterman”.

i. The Division Bench of this Court disposed of the pending LPA No. 1228/2007 vide order dated 25th August, 2010 directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent workman, at reduced back wages @ 40%.

j. Meanwhile, the petitioner had preferred SLP (C) No.19905/2009 before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court to seek grant of stay against the interim order dated 5th December, 2008 which was dismissed vide order dated 8th October, 2010 on the grounds of the same being infructuous in view of the final adjudication of the aforesaid appeal.

k. In terms of the award dat