DEEPAK KUMAR SHARMA vs M/S UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 27.03.2026 Pronounced on : 26.05.2026 Uploaded on : 26.05.2026 + W.P.(C) 5967/2019 DEEPAK KUMAR SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naman Jain, Advocate. versus M/S UNIVERSITY OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Manisha Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The present writ petition seeks to assail the award dated 20.10.2018, whereby the industrial dispute preferred by the petitioner/workman was decided against him, holding that he was not entitled to any relief. 2. Before proceeding further, it is apt to note that the impugned order is an outcome of the second round of litigation. The workman had earlier approached the Industrial Adjudicator, claiming that he had been employed as an Electrical-Khalasi in the Engineering Department of the management as a daily wager and had worked until 07.02.1994. The workman had further claimed that the management had regularized seven workers junior to him Signature Not Verified Digitally SignedPREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY W.P.(C) 5967/2019 Page 1 of 10 Signing Date:26.05.2026 21:54:29 and, in some cases, backdoor entries were also made. Pertinently, in his claim application, the claimant/workman had based his case on the violation of Sections 25B and 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the “ID Act”). The management had disputed the said claim and examined one P. N. Datta, who in his cross-examination stated that Shyam Lal, Jai Ram, Rameshwar, Ved Pal, Ram Niwas, Chhattar Pal, Inder Pal, Bharat Ram, Triveni, Balam Singh Rawat, and Dharam Pal were taken back on duty after 07.02.1994 on a daily wage basis as per their prior status, in accordance with the orders passed by the Court. The Industrial Adjudicator, not find