INTEGRAL COACH FACTORY EMPLOYEES CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE STORES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR. S.J. PARAVAS Vs. V. RAJAN ALWAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Petition is filed for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records connected with the order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras, dated 14th June, 1966 and made in M.S.E. Case No. 124 of 1965 and quash the same.

(2.) THE first respondent Rajan Alwar was working as a bill clerk in the Petitioner Co -operative Stores and his services were dispensed with effect from 1st June, 1965. The first respondent preferred and appeal against the said order to the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras. Notice of the appeal was served on the petitioner and he acknowledged the service but he did not appear to contest the appeal when it was taken up for hearing on 1st June, 1966. The appeal was heard ex parte. The Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation found that no proper enquiry had been held by the petitioner society and held that the provisions of Section 41(1) of the Madras Shops and Establishments Act, 1947, have been violated and the first respondent had been denied the principles of natural justice. Therefore, he set aside the order of the petitioner dated 1st June, 1965. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation for setting aside the ex parte order passed in favour of the first respondent and to re -opening a case heard ex parte. The present writ petition is filed against the order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, dated 14th June, 1966, which was passed in the absence of the petitioner.

(3.) IN Abdul Khadir Hadjiar v. A.K. Murthy : (1947) 2 MLJ 482 , a Bench of this Court had to consider the question whether under the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, an appellate authority can set aside its own ex parte order on the appeal. The Bench held that there were no provisions in the Act and that the ex parte order cannot be set aside. It was contended before the Bench that a writ of certiorari is a matter of discretion and that although the Court may be satisfied that the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to set aside its own ex parte order, nevertheless, in the circumstances of the case, a writ should not issue. It was observed: