Page 1

1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5446 OF 2016

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 13866 OF 2013] B.S.N.L.                                     Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS PAWAN KUMAR SHUKLA                           Respondent(s)

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5447 OF 2016

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 13965 OF 2013] J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.   1. Leave granted.   2. Having regard to the nature of work, for which the  respondents-workmen  were  engaged  and  having regard to the submission that the project is already over, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met if a lumpsum compensation is awarded to the workmen.   3. Therefore, in full and final settlement of all the  claims  available  to  the  respondents-workmen  in respect  of  their  daily  waged  engagement  under  the appellant,  the  respondents-workmen  shall  be  paid compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs) each.   4. We make it clear that in case, the appellant-BSNL engages  any  fresh  daily  wagers,  the

Page 2

2

respondents-workmen shall be given preference.   5. The compensation shall be paid within six weeks from today.   6. With the above observations and directions, the appeals are disposed of.   

No costs.   .......................J.

             [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]  New Delhi; July 01, 2016.

Page 3

3

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5448 OF 2016

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 35884 OF 2013] B.S.N.L.                                     Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS MOHD. JAMEY & ANR.  Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.   1. Leave granted.   2. We are informed that the respondent-workman has been working in the appellant-establishment for the last 13 years. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction, particularly in view of the fact that the respondent-workman is engaged as a Driver.  3. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.   

No costs.   .......................J.

             [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]  New Delhi; July 01, 2016.