Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004657

$~9

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

RESERVED ON –2^nd September, 2022

%

PRONOUNCED ON -2^nd November 2022

+

W.P.(C) 7926/2022, CM APPL. 24158/2022, CM APPL. 32932/2022

& CM APPL. 35957/2022

NNS ONLINE PVT LTD.

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.Vidit

Garg

and

Ms.Shipra

Mishral, Advocates

versus

GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ANOTHER

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr.Sunil Kumar, Adv. for respondent

no.1 with Mr.Manish Kumar Thakur,

Inspecting Officer, Labour Deptt.,

GNCTD.

Respondent no.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA,J :

1.

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated

25.03.2022 passed by Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rouse

Avenue, New Delhi, vide which the Learned Labour Court partly

allowed the application of the Respondent workman (claimant therein)

under order XII Rule 6, CPC, in the petition bearing LIR No. 1260/19,

under Section 17 (2) of the Working Journalist and Other Newspaper

Digitally Signed

By:PALLAVI VERMA

Signing Date:04.11.2022

15:29:54

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004657

Employees (Conditions of Service) and Misc. Provisions Act, 1955,

(W.J. Act) filed on behalf of the workman, seeking issuance of

Recovery Certificate against statutory dues and inter alia held that

there is no requirement of leading any evidence regarding the

relationship of employer and the employee.

2.

Following two issues were framed to be adjudicated and determined:

(i)

Whether employee - employer relationship exists between the

claimant Sh. Chandra Prakash Pandey S/o Late Sh. Satya Nath

Pandey (Age-44 years, Mobile No.9013121141) and the

respondents/ managements?

(ii)

And if so, claimant Sh. Chandra Prakash Pandey S/o late Sh.

Satya Nath Pandey is entitled to difference of arrears of wages

amounting Rs.84,97,158.76/- for the period from 01.01.2006 to

01.07.2018 as per Majithia Wage Board recommendation under

Working

Journalist

and

Other

newspaper

Employees(Conditions of Service) and Misc. Provisions Act,

1955, and if so, what directions are necessary in this regard?

3.

During the proceedings, respondent workman preferred an application

under Order XII, Rule 6, CPC seeking an order on admission qua the

management for issuance of recovery certificate as per the statement of

claim filed on behalf of the workman. Learned Labour Court vide the

Impugned Order has partly allowed the application of the respondent

workman under Order XII, Rule 6, CPC, only to the limited extent of

Digitally Signed

By:PALLAVI VERMA

Signing Date:04.11.2022

15:29:54

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/004657

the 1^st issue and disallowed the same with respect to the 2^nd issue and

inter alia held as under:

“10. Accordingly application is disposed of and decided to the

extent that there is no controversy remained to be adjudicated

on the issue of employee employer relationship between the

management and workman and no evidence is required to be

led. There is no admission by management on the issue of

dues as referred in para 9 of claim petition by the claimant

alleging that he is entitled to recover arrears as on 01.01.2006

to 01.07.2018amounting to Rs. 79,17,840.25 and dues from

January, 2008 to November, 2011 amounting to Rs.

5,79,358.51. Totalling Rs.84,97,158.76. Though there is

admission qua employee and employer relationship between

the parties but there is noun equivocal and unambiguous

admission on the part of management regarding arrears to

the tune of Rs. 84,97,158.76which is to be proved by leading

evidence by both the parties. In such circumstances, the

application in hand cannot be allowed in totality. It is made

clear that no evidence is required to be led on the issue of

employer employee relationship. Application is accordingly

disposed of.”

4.

Thus the main grievanc