Release of Co-Sureties’ Properties Bars Revival in Debt Recovery Proceedings: Karnataka High Court Rajasthan High Court Permits Summoning of Tower Location Records of Police Officials in Corruption Case ISF's Public Meeting | Freedom of Speech and Assembly Is Fundamental but Subject to Reasonable Restrictions: Calcutta High Court Single Blow Aimed at a Vital Part With Dangerous Weapon Constitutes Murder Under Section 302 IPC: Kerala High Court Orissa High Court Quashes FIR Against Law Students Over Ragging Incident Pre-Trial Detention Cannot Be Punitive; Bail is the Rule, Jail the Exception: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Accused in ₹3.06 Crore Forgery Case Collector's Actions in No Confidence Motion Held Illegal; Cost Imposed on State for Abdication of Statutory Duties: Allahabad High Court Judiciary as Guardian of the Constitution Must Address Failures in Law Enforcement: P&H High Court Demands Action Plan on 79,000 FIRs Pending Beyond Statutory Period NDPS | Presence of Contraband in Taxi Alone Is Not Proof of Guilt: Supreme Court Auction Purchaser’s Title Cannot Be Defeated by Unregistered Documents or Unsubstantiated Claims: Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order Land Acquisition | Section 28A Application Maintainable Based on Appellate Court’s Enhanced Compensation: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Using Article 142: ₹25 Lakh Settlement Ends All Pending Cases Common Intention Requires No Prior Planning; May Arise During the Incident: Supreme Court TESTIMONY OF PROSECUTRIX MUST "INSPIRE CONFIDENCE": SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS ACQUITTAL IN RAPE CASE

Supreme Court Awards Back Wages to Conductor Wrongfully Removed from Service

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has granted back wages to a conductor who was unlawfully terminated from service by the Delhi Transport Corporation. The appellant, Ramesh Chand, had been accused of collecting fares without issuing tickets but was subsequently found not guilty by the Labour Court. However, the appellant's claim for back wages had been denied by the lower courts.

Delivering the judgment, Justice Abhay S. Oka stated, "The fact whether an employee after dismissal from service was gainfully employed is something which is within his special knowledge. It is a negative burden on the employee to come out with the case that he was not gainfully employed after the order of termination." The Court emphasized that the appellant had successfully established his unemployment until a certain date and that the respondent had failed to provide any evidence to the contrary.

Considering the circumstances, the Supreme Court ordered the Delhi Transport Corporation to pay Rs. 3 lakhs to the appellant as back wages within two months. Justice Oka further added, "It all depends on the facts and circumstances of the case...the appellant cannot be granted the benefit of back wages for the entire period from the date of termination till reinstatement." The Court also clarified that if the payment was not made within the stipulated time, it would accrue interest at a rate of 9% per annum from the date of the appellant's reinstatement.

This judgment highlights the importance of the burden of proof in cases of wrongful termination and the entitlement to back wages. It establishes that the burden lies with the employee to prove their unemployment and that specific assertions made in the proceedings, backed by evidence, can play a crucial role in determining the outcome.

Date of Decision:  July 5, 2023

Ramesh Chand vs Management of Delhi Transport Corporation

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/05-Jul-2023-Ramesh-Chand-Vs-DTC.pdf"]

Similar News