NILACHANL SERVICE STATION Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE management of Nilachal Service station, (Indian Oil Petrol Pump), Grand Road, puri has filed this writ appeal challenging the judgment dated June 20, 2005 passed by a learned Judge of the writ Court in O. J. C. No. 14546/2001 wherein the learned Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ petition by a reasoned judgment. The present appellant was the petitioner before the writ Court and the writ petition was filed challenging dismissal of a restoration application which was registered as misc. Case No. 12/2000 by the Labour Court, bhubaneswar in respect of an ex parte award passed against the petitioner.

(2.) THE material facts are that an industrial dispute was raised by respondent No. 2 -workman challenging the legality of his termination from service by the management of nilachal Service Station. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the State government in exercise of powers conferred on it under the Industrial Disputes Act. The said reference runs as follows: "whether the termination of service of bhramarbar Das by the Management of nilachal Service Station (Indian Oil Petrol pump), Grand Road, Puri is legal and/ or justified? If not to what relief Das is entitled? on consideration of the material placed before it, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that the termination of service of the workman by the Management of Nilachal service Station was illegal and unjustified and the workman was entitled to reinstatement with full back wages. The case of the workman-respondent No. 2 is that after the award of the Labour Court was passed on august 19, 1985, he submitted the joining report which was accepted, but no wages were paid as per the award. Thereafter on October 16, 1985 the workman submitted an application for payment of wages. Since no action was taken on his application for payment of wages he filed an application under Section 33-C (2) of the industrial Disputes Act for computation of his entitlements under the award. The said application was registered as Industrial Dispute misc. Case No. 104/1987. Another application was also filed by the workman for computation of service which was registered as Industrial dispute Misc. Case No. 179/1991, dated november 25, 1989 along with an application for condonation of delay. As both the applications for condonation of delay and setting aside the exparte order dated November 25,1989 were rejected, the writ petitioner filed o. J. C. No. 2685/1991 and the said writ petition I was dismissed by a Divisional Bench of this court by order dated December 11, 1991. The said order passed by the Division Bench is to the following effect:

(3.) AT that juncture, the writ petitioner-appellant filed a misc. case before the presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar praying for setting aside the ex parte award which was passed in 1985. The Labour Court after looking into the records of the proceeding did not accept the plea of the writ petitioner that it did not receive the notice in that case. As such the application filed for condonation of delay was rejected as also the prayer for setting aside the ex parte award was also rejected. The labour Court after looking into the records of the proceeding did not accept the plea of the writ petitioner that it did not receive the notice in that case. As such, the application filed for condonation of delay was rejected as also the prayer for setting aside exparte award. This was done by the Labour Court by an order dated february 2, 1993. From the said order passed by the Labour Court it appears that the witness for the writ petitioner while appearing before the labour Court submitted that he took the copy of exhibit 1, i. e. , the award in 1989 and thereafter the writ petition was filed in this Court for setting aside the ex parte award which was dismissed as stated above.