Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Hansa Travels, an employer, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 17.02.2005 passed by the 2nd Labour Court, Nagpur, in Misc. Reference IDA No. 7/2003. The Labour Court had refused to set aside an exparte award dated 11.12.2002 in Ref. (IDA) No. 8/93, which granted reinstatement with continuity and full backwages to the first respondent, Moreshwar Gulabrao Tidke, setting aside his termination on 20th February 1992. The employer argued that before the Labour Court and before the High Court on 15.3.2005, it had expressed readiness to permit the workman to join duties. The employer also noted that the workman's whereabouts were unknown, requiring service through paper publication. The employer contended that the Labour Court had condoned the delay in filing the application for setting aside the award vide order dated 19.07.2004, but then refused to set aside the award on the same evidence, which was inconsistent. The High Court found merit in the employer's argument, noting that the Labour Court's order condoning delay should have led to setting aside the exparte award. The court observed that the employer's readiness to reinstate the workman was a relevant factor. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the Labour Court for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the Labour Court to decide the reference afresh after giving both parties an opportunity to be heard.
Headnote
A) Labour Law - Exparte Award - Setting Aside - Sufficient Cause - The employer challenged the refusal of the Labour Court to set aside an exparte award of reinstatement with full backwages. The High Court held that the Labour Court's order condoning delay in filing the application for setting aside the award, based on the same evidence, should have led to setting aside the award. The employer's consistent readiness to reinstate the workman was a relevant factor. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits. (Paras 2-5)
B) Labour Law - Condonation of Delay - Inconsistency - The Labour Court condoned the delay in filing the application for setting aside the exparte award but refused to set aside the award on the same evidence. The High Court found this inconsistent and set aside the order, directing the Labour Court to decide the reference afresh. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court erred in refusing to set aside the exparte award despite having condoned the delay in filing the application, and whether the employer's readiness to reinstate the workman constitutes sufficient cause for setting aside the exparte award.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 17.02.2005, and remanded the matter to the Labour Court for fresh adjudication on merits. The Labour Court was directed to decide the reference afresh after giving both parties an opportunity to be heard.
Law Points
- Setting aside exparte award
- condonation of delay
- sufficient cause
- reinstatement with backwages
- Labour Court jurisdiction
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 320
Writ Petition No. 1007/2005
Shri A.R. Patil for Petitioner, Smt. T.D. Khade, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3
M/s. Hansa Travels, through its Proprietor Shri Dilip Chaged
Moreshwar s/o Gulabrao Tidke, The Tahsildar, Nagpur Urban, The Presiding Officer, Second Labour Court, Nagpur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Labour Court refusing to set aside an exparte award.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner/employer sought to set aside the exparte award of reinstatement with full backwages and to have the matter adjudicated on merits.
Filing Reason
The Labour Court refused to set aside the exparte award despite having condoned the delay in filing the application, and the employer was ready to reinstate the workman.
Previous Decisions
The Labour Court passed an exparte award dated 11.12.2002 in Ref. (IDA) No. 8/93 granting reinstatement with continuity and full backwages. The Labour Court condoned the delay in filing the application for setting aside the award on 19.07.2004 but refused to set aside the award on 17.02.2005.
Issues
Whether the Labour Court erred in refusing to set aside the exparte award despite having condoned the delay in filing the application.
Whether the employer's readiness to reinstate the workman constitutes sufficient cause for setting aside the exparte award.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner/employer argued that the Labour Court condoned the delay in filing the application for setting aside the award on the same evidence, and thus should have set aside the award. The employer also expressed readiness to reinstate the workman.
The respondent nos. 2 & 3 (State) opposed the petition, but no specific arguments are recorded in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The Labour Court's order condoning delay in filing the application for setting aside the exparte award, based on the same evidence, should have led to setting aside the award. The employer's consistent readiness to reinstate the workman was a relevant factor. The refusal to set aside the award was inconsistent and unsustainable.
Judgment Excerpts
In this petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/employer has challenged the order dated 17.02.2005 passed by 2nd Labour Court, Nagpur, in Misc. Reference IDA No. 7/2003, below Exh.1-A refusing to set aside the exparte award.
He contends that in present writ petition, respondent no.1 was required to be served through paper publication as his whereabouts are not known.
He points out that the same evidence on the basis of which delay came to be condoned is also used for the purpose of setting aside exparte award.
Procedural History
The Labour Court passed an exparte award on 11.12.2002 in Ref. (IDA) No. 8/93. The employer filed an application to set aside the award, and the Labour Court condoned the delay on 19.07.2004. However, on 17.02.2005, the Labour Court refused to set aside the award. The employer then filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
