STATE OF J&K Vs. AFTAB AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER challenges award of wages to 42 labourers through respondent No. 1, their attorney holder/merely on the ground that their time -barred claim was wrongly entertained at his back, It transpires that a claim petition was filed by respondent No. 1 on behalf of 42 labourers for Rs. 70,580/ - on 8 -1 -1990. The concerned Authority entertained it after condoning the delay. Consequently, petitioner was summoned and he was represented by one Jaipal, Technical Officer. He filed objections, but failed to adduce any evidence in rebuttal. The Authority passed the award after appraisal of evidence and consideration of record and directed petitioner to satisfy it vide order dated 12.9.1990.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved, petitioner took an appeal before the learned District Judge, Rajouri who on re -appraisal of evidence on record upheld the award, vide judgment dated 22.12 1990. Petitioner has now come up before this court challenging the orders passed by the forums below. His star grievance is that a belated claim was wrongly entertained at his back and without hearing him. It is also contended that the claim is fictitious and the award a product of conspiracy between respondents 1 and 4.

(3.) I have heard LC for parties. All that remains to be considered is whether the Authority could have entertained the belated claim application without hearing the petitioner. I am unable to examine the other contention raised in view of the concurrent findings of fact by the forums below.