M/S A.P.APPARELS vs THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 23.05.2025 + W.P.(C) 15801/2023, CM APPL. 63583/2023 M/S A.P.APPARELS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneesh Bahri, Advocate. versus THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Shikha and Mr. Tarun Kumar, Advocates for R-3 alongwith R-3 in person. + W.P.(C) 16239/2023, CM APPL. 65320/2023 M/S A.P.APPARELS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneesh Bahri, Advocate. versus THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Shikha and Mr. Tarun Kumar, Advocates for R-3 alongwith R-3 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. By way of above-noted petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the impugned awards dated 05.09.2019 passed in ID No. 9750/2016 and 9751/2016 Signature Not Verified Signed By:GAUTAM W.P.(C) 15801/2023 & W.P.(C) 16239/2023 Page 1 of 4 ASWAL Signing Date:28.05.2025 01:59:45 respectively. 2. Since both the petitions have been filed by the same petitioner against the respondents/workmen who claim themselves to be their employees and further in view of the common submissions having been addressed, both the petitions are taken up for consideration and disposed of by this common judgment. 3. Upon claims being raised by the workmen, namely Indal Kumar Betha and Sanjay Chauhan, being respondents No.3 in both the petitions, individual references were sent by the Joint Labour Commissioner, Labour Department, West District, GNCTD. 4. On receipt of the references, notices were issued to the workmen after which statement of claims came to be filed. In their respective claims, the respondents No.3/workmen had claimed that their services were terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the management.