R.K. SOOD ART FRAMERS vs SATISH BHALLA & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

` * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 11.03.2026 + W.P.(C) 776/2019 R.K. SOOD ART FRAMERS .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Saurabh Jain, Advocate versus SATISH BHALLA & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr.M.P. Bhargava, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. Tushar Sannu alongwith Mr. Fajallu Rehman, Advocates for GNCTD Mr.L.R. Khatana, Advocate (Amicus Curiae). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the petitioner i.e., Management, seeking setting aside of the impugned order dated 14.09.2018 passed by the learned Labour Commissioner(South), Labour Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, under the Delhi Shops & Establishment Act, 1954 [hereafter referred to as ‘DSE Act’]. 2. Briefly stated, the claimants had filed a claim application under Section 21(3) of the DSE Act, wherein it was claimed that they were working with the Management, who were not providing them legal facilities under the labour laws. On such demand being made, their services were terminated after withholding their earned wages. It was further claimed that the Management did not pay their wages for the period from 01.07.2011 to Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI W.P.(C) 776/2019 Pg. 1 of 6 Signing Date:18.03.2026 17:57:15 ` 13.01.2012 and their services were terminated with effect from 14.01.2012. 3. It is further averred that the claimant (Satish Bhalla) was working as field worker and his last drawn wages were Rs.9,500/- per month. The unpaid salaries for six months and thirteen days amounted to Rs.63,321/-. The Management had paid sum of Rs.11,121/- as advance amount and the balance amount of Rs.52,000/- was yet to be received from the Management. 4. The second claimant i.e., Ram Chander, claimed