D D A Vs. ASHARFI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up today for final hearing.

(2.) This writ petition challenges the Award dated 30th July, 2002, passed in ID No. 74/2000 by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal No. 2 Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal") which found Smt. Asharfi Devi, the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the workman') eligible for pensionary benefits in accordance with the rule and regulations of the Horticulture Department, DDA.

(3.) In this case since the petitioner management/DDA had not filed the written statement, it was proceeded ex parte in the matter by the Tribunal's order dated 9th July, 2001. Accordingly on 5th October, 2001, an application was moved by the petitioner DDA for setting aside the ex parte proceedings against the petitioner management before the Tribunal which was dismissed for default by the Order dated 15th January, 2002 as none appeared for the DDA before the Tribunal. Again on 15th July, 2002 an application for restoration of the said application, disclosing the circumstances of the management's nonappearance moved before the Tribunal was rejected on 15th July, 2002. The wordings of the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal on the order dated 15th July, 2002 are eloquent and eloquently demonstrated the indifference and apathy of the petitioner management to the proceedings and read as under: At this stage the management has filed an application through Shri Ashish Sharma, ARM for setting aside the ex parte order dated 15.1.2002. Copy of the same is supplied to the opposite side. The application has been opposed on the ground that in the present case the management was granted time for filing the written statement. On 29.11.2000 the case was adjourned to 21.3.2001 for filling the written statement, and the case is adjourned to 9.7.2001 from 21.3.2001. On 9.7.2001, nobody appeared for the management for filing the written statement. Consequently, my predecessor passed the order of proceeding ex parte and fixed the case for ex parte evidence of the workman and the case was adjourned, to 5.10.2001. On 5.10.2001 when the workman was to lead the evidence, an application was moved to setting the ex parte order and my predecessor was pleased to adjourned, the case for 15.1.2002 for filing the reply to the application of setting aside ex parte order. Again on 15.1.2002, nobody appeared for the management. Then, the application under Order 9 Rule 7 for setting aside the ex parte order was dismissed in default. The present application had been moved for setting aside order dated 15.1.2002 by which the application for setting aside the Order dated 9.7.2001 was dismissed in default. In the application opportunity has been sought for grant of filing the written statement. It is pertinent to mention that reference made in the present case is as under"