Delhi High Court · 2026-05-26
MS BACKLIGHT FACTORY THROUGH SMT SARDARNI BALJEET KAUR & ORS. vs GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
- Citation / case number
- W.P.(C)-5164/2026 2026:DHC:4807
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- MS BACKLIGHT FACTORY THROUGH SMT SARDARNI BALJEET KAUR & ORS.
- Respondent
- GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
Judgment text excerpt
$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 26.05.2026 + W.P.(C) 5164/2026, CM APPL. 25268/2026, CM APPL. 36912/2026, CM APPL. 36913/2026 MS BACKLIGHT FACTORY THROUGH SMT SARDARNI BALJEET KAUR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. D.C. Narnolia, Advocate. versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rachita Garg, Mr. Abhinav Singh, Advs. for R1 to R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are stated to be the legal heirs of deceased Late Sh. Sardar Dilbagh Singh (proprietor of M/s Backlight Factory), assailing the Recovery Notice dated 05.03.2026 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Bawana) under Section 31 of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. 2. The dispute arose on account of a claim made by the respondent no. 3/workman, who was employed with the establishment of Late Sh. Sardar Dilbagh Singh. On 30.03.2017, while operating a machine without authorisation, the said workman’s right hand got caught in the machine, resulting in the amputation of two-thirds of his fingers. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated by the concerned workmen under the Employee’s Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5164/2026 Page 1 of 3 By:CHINU LUTHRA Signing Date:28.05.2026 16:07:59 Compensation Act, 1923. The same culminated in an Award dated 13.10.2021. The operative portion of the said Award, reads as under: 3. Admittedly, the said Award was not assailed by the petitioners by way of any legal proceedings. On the basis of the said Award, a recovery notice dated 05.03.2026 was issued by the SDM, Bawana under Section 31 of the Act. In the above background, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the same. 4. In th