Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: LCA No. 888/25
LOKENDER Vs. MCD
16.05.2026
Present : Ms. Niharika Pandey, AR of the workman.
Sh. Arvind Kumar, AR of the management.
Sh. Arvind Kumar has filed letter of authority on
behalf of the management.
An application is filed on behalf of the workman for
compliance of circular dated 09.02.2026, issued by the Ld. District
Judge, Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi.
Copy supplied to AR of the management.
Heard.
AR of the management has opposed the application.
He has stated that the Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge has
no role to play in the labour court matters. Assignment, transfer or
withdrawal of any matter under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
(in short, ‘I.D. Act’) is done by the appropriate Government /
concerned Labour Commissioner.
In the application, reliance has been placed on a
circular issued by Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI), RACC, New Delhi, dated
09.02.2026, bearing No. 4935/C-4990/C/Rules/RACC/2026.
File perused.
The submissions of AR of the management have
substance. Any transfer or withdrawal of a reference matter under
I.D. Act is prerogative of the appropriate Government. So far as an
application under Section 33C(2) of the I.D. Act is concerned, same
1/2
-- 1 of 2 --
is directly filed before the Labour Court as specified by the
appropriate Government. Ld. Principal District and Sessions Judge
has no role in either assignment or transfer of an application under
Section 33C(2) of the I.D. Act. Therefore, the circular dated
09.02.2026 has no applicability in the present case.
It is worth noting that the AR of the workman had
filed similar application in LCA No.887/25, titled ‘Bishamber Vs.
MCD’. The matter was listed at serial No.5 of the cause list. The
issue raised in the present matter has already been discussed in
detail in LCA No.887/25.
In LCA No.887/25, the AR of workman has tendered
unqualified apology in writing for her conduct. Her apology has
been accepted with caution. To be concise, further details of the
order passed in LCA No.887/25 are not discussed here.
From the conduct of the AR of the workman, it
appears that she has deliberately filed the instant application to
unnecessarily consume time of the court. Such frivolous
applications are consuming significant time of the court at the cost
of other matters.
For reasons already noted above, the application is not
maintainable. Same is dismissed with heavy cost. The workman is
burdened with cost of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand
only). The cost shall be paid in Army Welfare Fund. Receipt of
payment of cost be placed on record.
List for further proceeding on 13.07.2026.
(Sujit Saurabh)
Presiding Officer Labour Court-IX
RADC, New Delhi/16.05.2026
2/2
-- 2 of 2 --