1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2122/2005 (Mohammad Usman Vs.. Municipal Board, Makrana & Anr.) Date of Order : 07/05/2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. Rameshwar Hedau for the petitioner. Mr. P.R.Mehta for the respondent No.1. BY THE COURT:- By the instant writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the award Annex.1 dated 22.3.2003 passed by the respondent No.2 Labour Court, Jodhpur (for short 'the labour court' hereinafter) whereby the labour court made a 'no dispute award', as also the order dated 16.2.2005 (Annex.9) whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking setting aside of the no dispute award has been dismissed by the labour court. The petitioner filed an application before the labour court for setting aside of the no dispute award Annex.1 after expiry of period of 30 days from the date of its publication vide 2 Annex.2. Vide order Annex.9 dated 16.2.2005, the labour court dismissed the application seeking setting aside of the ex-parte award on the ground that after expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the award vide Annex.2, the labour court becomes functus officio. Hence this writ petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Municipal Board has relied on a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sangham Tape Co. Vs. Hans Raj, (2005) 9 SCC, 331, wherein Apex Court held that an industrial adjudication is governed by the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Rules framed thereunder. The Rules framed under the Act may provide for applicability of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Once the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are made applicable to the industrial adjudication, indisputably the provisions of Order 9 Rule 13 thereof would be attracted. But unlike an ordinary civil court, the Industrial Tribunals and the Labour Courts have limited jurisdiction in that behalf. While an Industrial Court will have jurisdiction to set aside an ex parte award, but having regard to the provision contained in Section 17-A of the Act, an application therefor must be filed before the expiry of 30 days from the publication thereof. Till then the Tribunal retains jurisdiction over the dispute referred to it for adjudication, and only up to that date it has the 3 power to entertain an application in connection with such dispute. This is because an award made by an Industrial Court becomes enforceable under Section 17-A of the Act on the expiry of 30 days from the date of its publication. Once the award becomes enforceable, the Industrial Tribunal and/or Labour Court becomes functus officio. It appears that the respondent State made a reference to the labour court vide corrigendum dated 13.4.1999. The notices of the reference were served on the concerned parties. The petitioner workman failed to file the statement of claim as also failed to appear before the labour court and prove his case. The Labour court came to the conclusion that since no statement of claim has been filed by the petitioner workman, there remains no dispute and accordingly passed a 'no dispute award'. In my view, the labour court was justified in passing the no dispute award in the facts and circumstances of the case as also was justified in declining to set aside the ex-parte award in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sangham Tape Co. Vs. Hans Raj (supra). In the circumstances, therefore, no case for interference is made out. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. (H.R.PANWAR),J. rp