Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-12-08

VIJAY KUMAR vs M/S. KARAWAL ENGINEERING COMPANY & ANR.

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-7378/2018 2025:DHC:10967
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
VIJAY KUMAR
Respondent
M/S. KARAWAL ENGINEERING COMPANY & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 03.12.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 08.12.2025 + W.P.(C) 7378/2018 VIJAY KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mobin Akhtar and Mr. Syed Sood, Advocates versus M/S. KARAWAL ENGINEERING COMPANY & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vijay Sehgal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA JUDGMENT CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by the claimant/workman in LIR No. 5774/2016, aggrieved by the Award dated 21.08.2017 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Presiding Officer, Labour Court-XIX, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, by which his claim for reinstatement and back wages was dismissed. Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 7378/2018 Page 1 of 11 Signed By:KOMAL DHAWAN Signing Date:09.12.2025 15:32:57 2. In this petition, unless otherwise specified, the parties will be referred to as described in the original proceedings. 3. In the statement of claim filed by the claimant/workman, it is alleged that he had been working with the respondent/management since 24.02.1999, as electrician and his last drawn wages was ₹11,500/- per month. He was discharging his duties honestly, diligently and to the entire satisfaction of the management. The management had taken his signature on several blank papers, vouchers, and partly printed papers at the time of his appointment. The papers, on which the workman's signatures had been taken, are still in the possession of the management. The workman could not complain about them, as he was in dire need of a job. He was deprived of various facilities such as appointment letter, attendance card, bonus, casual leave, etc. by the respondent/management. The workman had made several oral requests for the aforesaid legitimate facilities/cla

VIJAY KUMAR vs M/S. KARAWAL ENGINEERING COMPANY & ANR. · Niyam