EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, T.S. DIVISION, HVPNL, NARWANA DISTRICT JIND Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, HISAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the present writ petition is to the order dated 17.04.2013 (Annexure P -1) whereby, the Labour Court has declined to set aside the ex parte proceedings which were initiated on 04.10.2012 and by an order of even date, directed reinstatement with consequential benefits but for back wages.

(2.) THE admitted fact, which is apparent from the perusal of the paper book, would go on to show that a registered notice was sent by the Labour Court on 24.08.2012 to the petitioner -department for appearance on 04.10.2012. On account of non -appearance on 04.10.2012, the petitioner - department was proceeded against ex parte. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 22.11.2012 and 13.12.2012. Strangely, on 16.01.2013, one witness was produced by the workman and an application was filed to summon the clerk from the office of the respondents to produce the record. Lakhmi Chand, UDC appeared on 26.02.2013 and his statement was recorded. The department took no effort to file any application for setting aside the ex parte proceedings which were being conducted. Thereafter, on

(3.) THE said submission is without any basis. The first hurdle itself of giving any sufficient cause for non -appearance has not been crossed. There is no denying the fact that merely because an application has been filed, the Court is not to allow the same. The sufficient cause had to be shown to the Court so that the ex parte order could be set aside. The Apex Court in Parimal vs. Veena @ Bharti, 2011 (3) SCC 545, while discussing the scope of Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, has held that the sufficient cause has to be of such nature and it is not where the litigant can sit back and not defend the case and the said application is not to be allowed at the asking. It was held that the party has to satisfy the Court that it was prevented from sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called for hearing and the Court shall not set aside the ex parte proceedings solely on an application filed in which there was no sufficient cause shown. The relevant paras read thus: -