Disengaged Daily Wagers Must Submit Requisite Verification Documents Before Seeking Reinstatement and Arrear Wages

The applicants (57 in number) were employed as Daily Wager Safai Karamcharis under the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD)

They alleged that they were suddenly disengaged from service without any assigned reasons or a speaking order

The respondents, however, contended that during a post-inspection analysis of Ward No. 130, discrepancies were found in several Biometric Identification (BMID) numbers

The MCD issued orders on 22.12.2023 and 05.02.2024, asserting that 39 BMIDs were never issued by the IT Department and directing the workers to submit their first appointment letters and requisite documents for verification

The applicants were disengaged pending the submission of these documents

The applicants filed a joint representation on 28.01.2026, which remained undecided, leading to the present Original Application

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to resume their duties and receive back wages despite failing to submit the verification documents required by the respondents

2. Whether the joint representation submitted by the applicants fulfilled the requirements set out in the MCD’s disengagement orders

The court applied the administrative principle of "Reasoned and Speaking Orders," which requires authorities to dispose of representations by providing clear grounds for their decisions

It also recognized the procedural requirement for employees to comply with verification directives—specifically the submission of appointment orders and identity proofs—as a prerequisite for continued engagement and the accrual of a cause of action

The Tribunal examined the office orders dated 22.12.2023 and 05.02.2024, noting that the disengagement was not arbitrary but conditional upon the "submission of requisite documents" due to suspected BMID fraud

Upon reviewing the applicants' joint representation dated 28.01.2026, the Tribunal observed that it merely contained names and signatures and failed to include the specific documentation (such as first appointment orders) demanded by the MCD

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicants had not yet complied with the administrative instructions necessary to trigger a right to reinstatement or a valid cause of action against the respondents

The Tribunal held that if such individual representations and documents are submitted, the respondents must consider and dispose of them by passing a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks of receipt