MANAGER ZEN PHARMA Vs. LILA R PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Intra-Court Letters Patent Appeals have been filed by the appellants original petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 21.03.2011 passed by the Learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application Nos.16724 of 2010 with Special Civil Application Nos.178 to 190 of 2011 whereby the Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants herein.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that respondents - workmen were employed by respondent No.2. The appellant took over the unit of respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 terminated the services of the said workmen. Therefore, the said workmen (19 in all) approached the Labour Court, Valsad and filed References being Reference Nos.218 to 235 & 279 of 1997. In the said References, the appellant as well as respondent No.2 were joined as party and both appeared through their counsel. Since the counsel of the appellant i.e. Mr. M. B. Tamle did not remain present on various dates before the Labour Court, Valsad, the Labour Court by separate awards passed on different dates ex-parte decided the said References and directed the appellant to reinstate the workmen with continuity of service and 50% backwages. Award in Reference No.218 of 1997 was decided on 26.04.2006.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel Mr. K. M. Patel assisted by Mr. Hasmukh Thakker appearing for the appellants has urged that in view of decision of the Apex Court, if the counsel does not appear before the Court on various dates, the appellant was helpless and the Apex Court in such cases has held that liberal view should be taken and restoration application should be allowed. He placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq and another v. Munshilal and another, 1981 AIR(SC) 1400 wherein it is held that party should not suffer for misdemeanour or inaction of his counsel. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Chandigarh and another v. Raghu Raj, 2008 13 SCC 395 and in the case of Ram Kumar Gupta and others v. Har Prasad and another, 2010 1 SCC 391.