RAJESH SHARMA vs LUSENT TECHNOLOGY HINDUSTAN & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 13.10.2025 Pronounced on: 24.12.2025 + W.P.(C) 8220/2011 RAJESH SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kshitiz Mahipal, Ms. Khairun Nisa, Advs. versus LUSENT TECHNOLOGY HINDUSTAN & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mohit Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT RENU BHATNAGAR, J. 1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to award dated 28.04.2010, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, POLC-VII, Karkardooma, Delhi (hereinafter ‘Labour Court’) in I.D. No. 346/2004, whereby the claim of the petitioner alleging illegal termination and seeking reinstatement with consequential benefits was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner failed to establish the existence of any relationship of employer and employee between himself and Respondent No. 1. 2. Before adverting to the plea of the parties, this Court finds it appropriate to first lay down the facts for adjudication. Signature Not Verified Signed By:MADHU W.P.(C) 8220/2011 Page 1 of 25 SARDANA Signing Date:24.12.2025 16:46:12 3. The petitioner claims he was appointed as an Accountant with Lucent Technologies Hindustan Pvt. Ltd., who is Respondent No. 1 herein, on 15.04.1996 initially at a salary of Rs. 4,000/- per month and lastly drawing Rs. 17,000/- per month. 4. That M/s Tandon Vikas & Associates, Chartered Accountants, E-285, East of Kailash, New Delhi (Management No.2/Respondent No.2) introduced the workman with Management No. 1/Respondent No.1 herein. 5. The petitioner cleared a written test and interview conducted by Respondent No. 1, after which he was selected and appointed as an Accountant. He performed duties such as maintaining ledgers, preparing vouchers and day-to-day statements. 6. The petitioner allege