IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 28328 of 2008 Between: K.V. Seshagiri, S/o. Radha Krishna Murthy, R/o. H.No. 3-144, Kasavajhalavari Street, Gurajala Village & Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Guntur, Guntur District. 2 The Chief Executive, S.C.M. Sugar Limited Koppa (P) Maddur (Tq), Mandya District, Karnataka State. 3 The Managing Director, Nagarjuna Cooperative Sugar Limited, Gujarajala, Guntur District, A.P. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI K.V.N.PAVAN FOR SRI B.CHANDRASEN REDDY Counsel for respondents 1 and 3: None appeared Counsel for respondent No.2: SRI V.HARI HARAN The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to set aside award dated 05-12-2007 in I.D.No.137 of 2004 on the file of respondent No.1. Heard Sri K.V.N.Pavan, learned counsel representing Sri B.Chandrasen Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V.Hari Haran, learned counsel for respondent No.2. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute, which was taken on file as I.D.No.137 of 2004 by respondent No.1. The said I.D was dismissed by the impugned award on 05-12-2007, on the ground that the petitioner was called absent on two occasions. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause for not being represented through his counsel, because his counsel underwent bypass heart surgery. He further submitted that, at any rate under Rule 24 of the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 (for short “the Rules”), even if the petitioner was not represented, respondent No.1 ought to have proceeded as if the party has nothing to file the statement of demands/rejoinder and that the party had duly attended or had been represented. S ri V.Hari Haran, learned counsel for respondent No.2, submitted that the very I.D itself is not maintainable before respondent No.1, because no part of cause of action has arisen either within the jurisdiction of respondent No.1 or for that matter within the State of Andhra Pradesh. In my considered opinion, the issue of maintainability of I.D requires to be decided by respondent No.1 after hearing both the parties. Rule 24 of the Rules reads as under- “24.Power of the Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or Arbitrator to proceed ex-parte etc.:- If without sufficient cause being shown any party to the proceeding before a Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or Arbitrator fails to file the statement of demands/rejoinder and, or to attend or to be represented the Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or Arbitrator may proceed as if the party has nothing to file the statement of demands/rejoinder and as if the party had duly attended or had been represented. Provided that in case where one of the parties fails to file statement of demands/rejoinder and, or to attend or to be represented, the Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or Arbitrator may proceed ex-parte. Provided further in case both the parties fails to file statement of demands/rejoinder and, or to attend or to be represented, the Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or Arbitrator may close the proceedings as having not been pressed by the parties.” From the Rule reproduced above, it is clear that if a party is not present at the time of hearing, respondent No.1 shall proceed as if the party has duly attended or has been represented. This necessarily implies that respondent No.1 is not entitled to dismiss the I.D in default. The Labour Court/Tribunal has got obligation to decide the dispute on merits. In this view of the matter, the impugned award is set aside. The case is remitted to respondent No.1 for fresh consideration and disposal of I.D.No.137 of 2004, in accordance with law, after hearing both the parties. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th March, 2009 vrn