SHAH ENANATALI NADIRALI Vs. MESO PRIVATE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner - workman has prayed for an appropriate writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and award dated 11/10/2004 passed by Labour Court, Gandhidham -Kutch in Reference (ICG) No. 36/2003 dismissing the said Reference for default as well as order dated 13/02/2006 passed by the Labour Court, Gandhidham -Kutch in I.D. Misc. Application No. 2 of 2005, which was filed to restore the main Reference, which also came to be dismissed for non -prosecution.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the decisions of this Court rendered in the case of Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railway, Rajkot and Anr. v. Secretary, Paschim Railway Karmachari Parishad, Ahmedabad, 2002 2 GLR 1164; in the case of Mohitosh Dass C/o. Gujarat Rajya Kamdar Union v. M.G. Memon or His successor in Office, Presiding Officer and Anr., 2004 2 GLR 1475 as well as recent decision of this Court rendered in the case of Chandrakant Devgiri Giri v. Porbandar Nagarpalika, 2009 2 GLH 228, the impugned order dated 11/10/2004 passed by the Labour Court, Gandhidham -Kutch in Reference (ICG) No. 36/2003 in dismissing the said Reference for default, cannot be sustained. Consequently, the order dated 13/02/2006 passed by Labour Court, Gandhidham -Kutch in I.D. Misc. Application No. 2 of 2005, which was filed under Rule 26 -A of the Industrial Disputes (Gujarat) Rules, cannot be sustained and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and the matter is required to be remanded to the concerned Labour Court for deciding the said Reference afresh and in accordance with law and on merits.

(3.) AT this stage, Mr. D.C. Dave, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent has submitted that in that case a suitable observation be made that while considering the matter on merits on remand, if ultimately Labour Court holds in favour of the Petitioner, Labour Court may consider that the delay has been occurred on the part of the Petitioner -workman and the aforesaid aspect may be considered while awarding backwages.