DAYANAND SHARMA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both the writ applications, common questions of law with little variation on fact arise and as such they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Petitioner claims to be a workman engaged by respondent No.2 B.S.A. Corporation, a Gun Factory/situated in the town of Munger. He filed application claiming certain monetary benefits under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This led to registration of Misc. Case No. 30 of 1994. By an ex pane order dated July 21, 1998 relief sought for by the petitioner was granted. Respondents 2 to 4 filed application on June 2, 1999 under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as the Code for setting aside the ex. pane order and for restoration of Misc. Case No. 30 of 1994, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 6 of 1999. The Labour Court by order dated. December 15, 1999 set aside the ex parte order and restored the Misc. Case.

(3.) In C.W.J.C. No. 10826 of 1999 the petitioner has challenged the said order.