STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. ASHOK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-State of Rajasthan has challenged the order dated 1. 8. 94 by which the application of the petitioner-State for setting aside the exparte award passed by the Court, Bharatpur on 1. 2. 94 was rejected as the petitioner- State failed to make out a case in its favour regarding its non appearance on the date when the exparte award was passed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that after receipt of notice from the Labour Court for deciding the reference in regard to termination of the service of the respondent-workman, it filed appearance before the Labour Court and sought time to file reply, but the same was not filed and the Labour Court passed the exparte award which according to the petitioner-State was unjustified as no exparte award should have been passed. However, the Labour Court noted that the petitioner- State inspite of several adjournments having been granted to it, failed to file reply in the matter and hence the matter could not be deferred further and an exparte award was passed after which it noticed that neither notice nor three months pay in lieu of notice was given to the respondent-workman which was a clear violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the ID Act" ). Consequently, the exparte award passed in favour of the respondent-workman directed his reinstatement granting him 50% of back wages for a period of 10 years. The Labour Court, however, did not consider even an iota of evidence before granting 50% back wages to the respondent- workman as to whether he was gainfully employed during this period or not. LEARNED counsel for the petitioner therefore has stated that the application refusing to set aside the exparte award as also the award should be set aside by this Court as the petitioner-State showed sufficient cause for non appearance on different dates and therefore, the exparte award should not have been passed and the matter should have been deferred.