MANAGER PACKPLAST INDUSTRIES KOTA Vs. SIYA RAM PATIDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-M/s Packplast Industries, has filed both these writ petitions challenging the order passed by the Labour Court, Kota which has refused to set aside the Ex-parte award passed in favour of the petitioner determining the question that the petitioner-industry was legally bound to pay Rs, 21,000/- by way of over-time allowance to the workman-respondent No. 1 as he had discharged 12 hours of duty daily by way of over-time. THE petitioner had duly been served with a show cause notice to appear before the Labour Court which had to adjudicate upon the dispute but the petitioner-industry failed to appear before the Tribunal inspite of service of notice which is admitted by the petitioner-industry. THE Labour Court, therefore, passed an ex-parte award in favour of respondent- workman on 3. 7. 98. THE petitioner-industry thereafter filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte award on 18. 11. 99 wherein it was stated that the notice although was served on the employee of the petitioner-industry, he had left the job due to which the matter could not be contested before the court. THE Labour Court however, refused to set aside the ex-parte award as it was concluded by the learned Judge of the Labour Court that the petitioner-industry had not disclosed any reason much less sufficient in order to impress upon the Labour Court to set aside the ex-parte award. the notice having been duly served on the petitioner-industry it was held that the ex-parte award which determined Rs. 21,000/- only for payment by way of over-time wages to the respondent-workman was not fit to be set aside or recalled. THEse writ petitions have challenged the order dated 2. 11. 2000 passed by the Labour Court, Kota which has refused to set aside the impugned order.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, assailing the order refusing to set aside the exparte award of the Labour Court, submitted that the respondent-workman had already entered into a settlement/compromise with the petitioner-industry who had been paid the entire amount on 181. 94 in regard to his wages towards over-time duty and for this purpose he had also filed an affidavit disclosing this fact and since no amount was payable by the petitioner-industry the exparte award should be set aside by this court as also the order refusing to set aside the exparte award.