GAJRA GEARS PVT. LTD. Vs. SHIV PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the ex parte award dated 20/12/2017 passed in case No.113/I.D.Reference/2017 by the Labour Court, Dewas. The reference has been answered in favour of the respondent/workman setting aside the order of superannuation dated 20/05/2016 with further direction for reinstatement with full back wages. By the order dated 26/02/2019 the application under Order 9 rule 13 CPC filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed.

(2.) Ms. Kirti Patwardhan, learned counsel for the petitioner / factory while criticizing the order dated 26/02/2019 (Annexure P/6) refers to the application filed under Order 9 rule 13 CPC (Annexure P/4) and submits that the summons for appearance before the labour Court on 08/11/2017 though were received by the employee of factory, namely; Bhupendra Kumar Pandey but, the same could not be acted upon for contacting the advocate and appearing in the Court due to the fact that Bhupendra Kumar Pandey has suffered slip disc and had undergone for treatment. Therefore, non-appearance of the petitioner before the labour Court was bona fide. There is sufficient cause for the same. Learned counsel also refers to the photo copies of the medical documents annexed with the application to bolster her submission. According to her, the labour court did not either address the justification of non-appearance, nor the medical documents placed on record. Hence, the impugned order dated 26/02/2019 (Annexure P/6) be set aside and also the award dated 20/12/2017 (Annexure P/3) with a direction to the labour Court to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter decide the said reference.

(3.) Per contra, Shri Ravindra Upadhaya learned counsel for the respondent/workman submits that the labour Court while passing the award dated 20/12/2017 or dismissing the application filed under Order 9 rule 13 CPC vide order dated 26/02/2019 has not committed any illegality or jurisdictional error warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.