AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.P. Shah, J.—This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks to challenge the ex parte award dated April 19, 1999 made by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 in Reference No. UIT/1/12 of 1999 under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Few facts giving rise to this petition, are these:
The Respondent workman raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer, Mumbai on August 29, 1997 demanding reinstatement in service with continuity of service and back wages from the petitioner company. The petitioner company participated in the conciliation proceedings which ended in failure. On the failure report of the Conciliation Officer a reference came to be made to the Tribunal being reference No. CGIT/1/12 of 1999 for adjudication. It seems that the Tribunal issued notice to the company as well as to the workmen fixing the date of hearing on March 12, 1999. On March 12, 1999 the statement of claim was filed by the workmen. There is some controversy whether the notice was served on the petitioner. According to the petitioner notice was not received by the petitioner and acknowledgment is not signed by the officer who was authorised to accept the service. On the other hand accordingly the workmen notice was duly served. Be that as it may, the Tribunal thereafter fixed the matter on April 15, 1999 on which date the workmen filed an affidavit in support of their claim and an ex parte award came to be passed on April 19, 1999. The Petitioner company applied for setting aside the ex parte award by filing Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 1999 which came to be dismissed by the Tribunal on August 10, 1999. The legality and correctness of these orders is questioned in the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
I have heard the petitioner at some length. Mr. Cama strenuously contended that the notice was not served on the petitioner company. Xerox copy of the acknowledgment was produced for my perusal. It is not clear from the Xerox copy as to who has signed the acknowledgment on behalf of the company. The company seal is also not clearly visible. From the material as recorded it is difficult to conclude that company was properly served. In my opinion this is a fit case for setting aside the ex parte award. Accordingly the ex parte award dated April 19, 1999 is quashed and set aside. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on September 14, 1999. The Tribunal shall hear and decide the matter as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than three months from today.
Petitioner company is directed to pay costs of this petition to the respondent workmen quantified at Rs. 5000/-.
Certified copy expedited.