NELLORE DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD Vs. PRESIDENT NELLORE DT CO OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK EMPLOYEES ASSN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for consideration in this writ appeal arising out of a judgment and order dated November 18, 2000 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 7796 of 2000 is as to whether the Labour Court or the Industrial Tribunal can set aside an exparte order despite publication of the award in the official gazette in terms of Section 17-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(2.) An exparte award against the appellant was passed on October 31, 1997. It did not file an application to set aside the award within a period of 30 days but filed such an application 40 days thereafter. The Labour Court rejected the application on the ground that the same cannot be entertained having regard to the fact that the application for setting aside the exparte order was filed beyond the period of 30 days from the date of the award and the same has already been published in the gazette. Consequently, it was held that it had no power to condone the delay. The said decision was based upon a judgment of the Apex Court in Grindlays Bank Limited v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal, AIR 1981 SC 606 : 1980 Supp SCC 420 : 1981-I-LLJ-327. The appellant-writ petitioner questioned the said judgment inter alia on the ground that subsequently the Apex Court in Satnam Varma v. Union of India AIR 1985 SC 294 : 1984 Supp SCC 712 : 1985-I- LLJ-79 and Anil Sood v, S. K. Sarvaria, 1997-I-LLJ-1066(Del-DB), has taken a different view.

(3.) The learned single Judge relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Satnam Varma's case (supra) which was followed by this Court in APSRTC v. K. Bhoomaiah, 1987 LLN 240, by the order under appeal held that "despite passing of an exparte award the Court does not become functus officio". But the learned Judge proceeded to dispose of the matter on merits holding that the appellant herein has not been able to satisfy the Court as regards its justification in approaching the Labour Court after a delay of 40 days. The contention raised in this appeal shortly is that the learned single Judge acted contrary to law in determining the disputed question of fact itself having arrived at a conclusion that it is a petition for setting aside the ex parte award as also an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was maintainable. Section 17-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 reads thus: