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

april 2026

Delhi High Court · 2026-04-29

THE UNION OF INDIA vs SH SHIV KUMAR & ANR.

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-15006/2025 2026:DHC:3680
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
THE UNION OF INDIA
Respondent
SH SHIV KUMAR & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~114 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29.04.2026 + W.P.(C) 15006/2025 and CM APPL.27576/2026 THE UNION OF INDIA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, (CGSC) along with Mr. Sarvan Kumar (SPC) for UOI. versus SH SHIV KUMAR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amar Jain, Mr. Amritesh Mishra, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Nusrat Hossain, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition assails an award dated 24.05.2024 passed by the Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 & Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi, in Claim Application No.MWA- 360/2021. 2. The said award/order has been passed in the context of a contract awarded by the petitioner to the respondent no.2 (M/s Professional Management Services) for providing outsourced manpower, including casual labourers, canteen attendants and a supervisor, for the period commencing 01.12.2018. The said contractual arrangement came to an end on 31.03.2021. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 15006/2025 Page 1 of 3 By:CHINU LUTHRA Signing Date:30.04.2026 17:33:07 3. The respondent no. 1 was engaged by the contractor. The respondent no.1 alleges non-payment/short payment of minimum wages. Based on his complaint, proceedings were initiated before the Labour Authority. The said proceedings culminated into the impugned award/order dated 24.05.2024, which, inter alia, reads as under: 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to non-cooperation of the respondent no.2, it could not effectively present its case before the Authority. It is further submitted that the primary liability to pay the amount to the concerned worker is that of the respondent no.2. 5. It is noticed that the concerned Au

THE UNION OF INDIA vs SH SHIV KUMAR & ANR. · Niyam