Law Does Not Countenance Resurrection Of Stale Claims Through Inventive Drafting: Karnataka High Court Rejects 20-Year-Old Partition Dispute CPC Provisions Cannot Be Used to Transfer Consumer Complaints Across States: NCDRC Invokes Section 62 to End Forum-Shifting Ordeal in Nirmal Spinning Mills Case FSSA Provisions Prevail Over PFA Act In Cases Of Overlapping Jurisdiction, Prosecution Under Old Act Impermissible: J&K High Court Motive Pales Into Significance When Direct Ocular Evidence Establishes Crime; Enmity Is A Double-Edged Sword: Allahabad High Court Plaintiff Cannot Succeed Merely On Weakness Of Defence; Initial Burden To Prove Claim Rests On Claimant: Madras High Court Witness Threats Noted By Higher Courts Disentitle Convict To Suspension Of Sentence: Gujarat High Court Family Court Orders Must Be Enforced Immediately, Pendency Of Applications No Excuse For Disobedience: Delhi High Court 'Fraud And Justice Never Dwell Together': Karnataka High Court Reverses Order To Grant Land Based On Fabricated Records Development Authority Competent To Sanction Land Use Conversion From Residential To Nursing Home If Permitted Under Master Plan & Zoning Regulations: Allahabad High Court Notification Changing Import Policy From 'Free' To 'Restricted' Operative Only From Exact Time Of Publication In E-Gazette: Delhi High Court On Name Of Protection of the Complainer Excluding Relevant Defence Evidence in Sexual Offences Trials May Breach Fair Trial Rights: UK Supreme Court Boundaries In Sale Deed Prevail Over Discrepancy In Property Description; Adverse Possession Begins From Date Of Hostile Notice: Punjab & Haryana HC Supreme Court of UK Upholds HMRC Decision: Professional Fees Incurred by Investment Holding Company Are Capital Expenditure Criminal Law Cannot Be Used To Silence Citizens Questioning Legality Of Police Action: Madras High Court Quashes Obstruction Case Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Centre To Treat Ashok Khemka As Empaneled For Future Assignments, Says Denying Relaxation Granted To Peers Is Discriminatory Section 34 Court Cannot Substitute Arbitrator’s Plausible View With Its Own; Not Bound By Technical Rules Of Evidence Act: Madras High Court Article 227 Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Reopen Decrees Finalized Four Decades Ago: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Challenge To 1985 Order Daughter Has No Right To Inherit Agricultural Land If Succession Opened Before 2005 HSA Amendment: Delhi High Court Rejects Plaint Indian Trust Act Inapplicable To Public Religious Endowments; Sale Of Charity Property Without HR&CE Commissioner's Permission Void: Madras High Court Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Collateral Warranties Under Construction Contracts FIR Quashed Against Newsclick: PMLA Proceedings Cannot Stand Alone Without A Predicate Offence, Rules Delhi High Court Assessee Claiming TDS Exemption On "Reimbursement" To Non-Residents Must Obtain Mandatory Tax Determination Under Section 195(2): Madras High Court

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"]

Latest Legal News