W.P.(C) 8931/2022 & W.P.(C) 8948/2022

Page 1 of 8

$~1 & 2

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) 8931/2022, CM APPL. 26847/2022

AIR INDIA LTD

..... Petitioner

Through:

Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Sr. Adv. with Ms.

Nina Gupta, Ms. Ananya Marwah and

Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh, advocates

versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Sr.Panel Counsel

with Mr.Rudra Paliwal and

Mr.Devvrat Yadav, Govt.Pleaders

and Ms. Divya Srivastava, Advocate

Mr.Inder Jit Singh, Adv. for R-2

+

W.P.(C) 8948/2022

AIR INDIA LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through:

Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Sr. Adv. with Ms.

Nina Gupta, Ms. Ananya Marwah and

Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh, advocates

versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Rahul Sharma, CGSC with

Mr. C.K. Bhatt, Mr.Sparsh Chaudhary

and Mr.Ayush Bhatt, Advocates for

respondent No.1/Union of India.

Mr.Inder Jit Singh, Adv. for R-2.

%

Date of Decision: 24th August, 2022

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1.

Present writ petitions have been filed seeking the following prayers:

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003296

W.P.(C) 8931/2022 & W.P.(C) 8948/2022

Page 2 of 8

of 2014 and upheld the domestic enquiry proceedings”

2.

Learned counsel for respondent no.2/workman has disputed as to the

maintainability of the writ petitions. Learned counsel submits that the

present writ petitions have been filed only to delay the trial and are thus

liable to be rejected.

3.

Dr. Lalit Bhasin, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners

has submitted that in fact in the impugned order the learned labour

court has overlooked the directions passed by this court in W.P.(C)

426/2019 and W.P.(C) 472/2019 titled as Air India Ltd. vs. Sanjay

Kaura and Air India Ltd. vs. FG Runda vide order dated 03.07.2019.

Learned senior counsel submits that in terms of this, learned Labour

Court was firstly directed to examine the case of the parties afresh in

terms of the principles laid down in State Bank of Travancore v. Prem

Singh, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8258. Dr. Bhasin submits that instead of

following the directions of this court, learned Labour Court has

directed the petitioner to bring evidence to prove the enquiry which has

been set aside by the learned Labour court on account of being in

violation of principles of natural justice. It would be advantageous to

refer to certain background facts in brief. The claimants herein were

employees of AIR India Ltd. The charge-sheet of misconduct was

served on them and a domestic enquiry was conducted in 2003. At the

end of the enquiry, the appropriate disciplinary authority passed an

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003296

W.P.(C) 8931/2022 & W.P.(C) 8948/2022

Page 3 of 8

order of dismissal against the claimants with effect from 13.07.2012.

and 22.01.2013. The departmental appeal filed against this order was

dismissed by order dated 21.06.2013 and 31.07.2013.

4.

The respondents/workmen raised an industrial dispute which was

referred by the appropriate authority to the learned CGIT. In the CGIT,

a preliminary issue was framed as to the fact that whether the enquiry

was held in violation of the principles of natural justice. The tribunal

vide order dated 10.08.2018, inter alia held that the domestic enquiry

against the claimants was conducted in violation of principles of natural

justice to the prejudice of the workmen in an unfair manner. The

petitioner management challenged this order before this court vide

W.P.(C) Nos. 426/2019 and 475/2019. This court while disposing of

these writ petitions inter alia held as under:

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003296

W.P.(C) 8931/2022 & W.P.(C) 8948/2022

Page 4 of 8

principles laid down by this Court in State Bank of Travancore

Reference be made to