Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. ASHOK v. Through

Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus ANITA .....Respondent Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 1 Through: Ms. Meghna De, Ms. L. Gangmee, Ms. Surbhi Bagra and Mr. Ritwik Raj, Advocates. 58 + 59 + 60 + 61 + CM(M) 3727/2024 & CM APPL. 63485/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel RAJAN for MCD. versus .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meghna De, Ms. L. Gangmee, Ms. Surbhi Bagra and Mr. Ritwik Raj, Advocates. CM(M) 3728/2024 & CM APPL. 63487/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAJ KUMARI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meghna De, Ms. L. Gangmee, Ms. Surbhi Bagra and Mr. Ritwik Raj, Advocates. CM(M) 3729/2024 & CM APPL. 63490/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. SURESH CHAND versus .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3750/2024 & CM APPL. 64028/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 2 versus BINESH .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meghna De, Ms. L. Gangmee, Ms. Surbhi Bagra and Mr. Ritwik Raj, Advocates. CM(M) 3751/2024 & CM APPL. 64065/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus SHILA .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3752/2024 & CM APPL. 64069/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus PINKI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meghna De, Ms. L. Gangmee, Ms. Surbhi Bagra and Mr. Ritwik Raj, Advocates. CM(M) 3807/2024, CM APPL. 66077/2024 & CM APPL. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAMLESH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3808/2024 & CM APPL. 66079/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner 62 + 63 + 64 + 65 + Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 3 66 + 67 + 68 + Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus SUSHIL ....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3809/2024 & CM APPL. 66081/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus MUNESH PAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3811/2024, CM APPL. 66126/2024 & CM APPL. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus MUKESH KUMAR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3871/2024 & CM APPL. 67853/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus LATA .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 4 69 + 70 + 71 + 72 + 73 CM(M) 3873/2024 & CM APPL. 67861/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus ANIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3874/2024, CM APPL. 67865/2024 & CM APPL. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus HOSHIARI .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3893/2024 & CM APPL. 68444/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAJWATI .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3894/2024 & CM APPL. 68446/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus LEELU .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 5 + CM(M) 3895/2024 & CM APPL. 68448/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus BABU .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3896/2024 & CM APPL. 68450/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus VINOD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3897/2024 & CM APPL. 68463/2024 & CM APPL. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. SANTOSH KUMAR versus .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3898/2024 & CM APPL. 68465/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. 74 + 75 + 76 + Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 6 versus RAJKUMAR .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3901/2024 & CM APPL. 68471/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus SHEESH PAL SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3904/2024 & CM APPL. 68555/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus CHANDADEVI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3962/2024 & CM APPL. 70375/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. SAROJ versus Through: CM(M) 3963/2024 & CM APPL. 70380/2024 .....Respondent 77 + 78 + 79 + 80 + Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 7 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAJ KUMAR ....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CM(M) 3966/2024 & CM APPL. 70395/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI KAVITA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus Through: Appearance not given. .....Respondent CM(M) 3967/2024 & CM APPL. 70401/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus DHARAM PAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3968/2024, CM APPL. 70410/2024 & CM APPL. 81 + 82 + 83 + Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 8 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus SAVITRI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. 84 + 85 + 86 + CM(M) 3969/2024, CM APPL. 70433/2024 & CM APPL. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAJKALI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3970/2024 & CM APPL. 70437/2024 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI GUDDI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CM(M) 3971/2024, CM APPL. 70476/2024 & CM APPL. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 9 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for MCD. versus RAKESH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohan Mandal, Mr. Mohit Garg and Mr. R.K. Pandit, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Ms. Tajinder Virdi, learned Standing Counsel for MCD/Management has, during the course of the arguments, restricted relief with respect to waiver of the cost only. 2. She submits that in all the 33 matters, applications had been moved by the Management/MCD seeking dismissal of the applications filed by the workman under section 33-C (2) of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and learned Presiding officer, Labour Court, while dismissing all such applications, vide order dated 13.09.2024, burdened them with exemplary cost of Rs.20,000/- in each case. Such cost, instead of being paid to the opposite side, is to be deposited with Delhi Legal Services Authority, Rouse Avenue, District Courts, Delhi, within four weeks. 3. Ms. Virdi submits that the MCD/Management, while defending the matters, had simply moved applications in accordance with law and even if the applications were to be dismissed, there was no necessity of putting such cost. It is vehemently contended that the applications were not moved with Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 10 any ulterior motive or to delay the proceedings. According to her, the MCD/Management was seeking dismissal of the Applications of the workmen filed under 33-C (2) of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and therefore, it merely wanted to bring forth the malpractice of duplicity in initiating legal recourse by the Workmen, for similar claim and cause of action, before two different forums i.e. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal as well as Labour Courts. According to her, the jurisdiction with respect to pending matters in question vested with Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal only and not with Labour Court. Therefore, those applications were moved and even if those lacked any merit, the cost, in such arbitrary manner, should not have been imposed. 4. There is appearance, in most of the matters today, from the side of the respondent and during course of the arguments, Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents/workmen have left it to this Court to pass appropriate order with respect to waiver of cost, while supplementing that the cost was imposed as the learned Labour Court was of the view that such applications could not have been filed as these were in teeth of the specific directions contained in order dated 13.08.2024 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) 10704/2024. 5. Having gone through the entire matter and keeping in mind the overall facts of the case as well as above order dated 13.08.2024, it is felt that imposition of cost of Rs. 20,000/- was excessive, particularly, when there is nothing to suggest any kind of malafide, behind moving said applications. 6. Resultantly, the cost is reduced to Rs.1000/- from Rs.20,000/- in each such case. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 11

7. Let the cost be deposited within four weeks from today with the same Authority and proof of deposit be placed before the learned Labour Court. 8. Learned Senior counsel for respondents/workmen also submit that they would move appropriate application before the learned Labour Court seeking direction to, at least, release the admitted amount in favour of such workman. Such liberty is always available to them. It is, however, expected that, as and when any such application is moved, after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the parties, the same may be disposed of in accordance with law. 9. Learned Labour Court shall also make best endeavour to dispose of the claims, expeditiously. 10. All the present petitions, along with pending applications, stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. APRIL 17, 2025/ss/shs (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:48:39 CM(M) 3696/2024 & other connected matters 12