1 wp 6035.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6035 OF 2010 The Executive Engineer P.W.D. No. 2, Osmanabad .. Petitioner Versus Gafur Papamiya Saudagar .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6036 OF 2010 The Executive Engineer P.W.D. No. 2, Osmanabad. .. Petitioner Versus Ayub Mohhamadali Shaikh .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6410 OF 2010 The Executive Engineer P.W.D. No. 2, Osmanabad. .. Petitioner Versus Balsaheb Madhukar Shete .. Respondent 2 wp 6035.10 Shri R. P. Phatake, A.G.P. for the Petitioner/State in all matters. Shri K. A. Kadam, Advocate for the Respondent in all matters. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 23RD AUGUST, 2011. PER COURT : . The present respondents had filed references. The Presiding Officer for Industrial Adjudication and Judge Labour Court, Latur allowed the said references directing the present petitioner to reinstate the respondents with backwages with all service benefits vide award dated 04.07.2008. The present petitioner filed Miscellaneous Reference before the Presiding Officer for Industrial Adjudication and Judge Labour Court, Latur i. e. restoration application U/Sec. 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act in respect of ex-parte awards passed. The said applications were filed on 06 th October, 2008. The same are rejected. Aggrieved thereby the present writ petitions are filed. 2. Shri Phatake, the learned A. G. P. submits that the authority has not considered that the notices itself were not served on the petitioner and the petitioner did not have the knowledge of the References. According to the learned A. G. P. erroneous judgments have been passed. 3 wp 6035.10 3. Per contra, Shri Kadam, the learned counsel for respondents supports the order and states that the Court after one month of passing of the award becomes functus officio and cannot entertain an application for setting aside ex-parte award. 4. With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the judgments. The award is passed on 04.07.2008. It became enforceable on 04.08.2008. The petitioner is required to file an application for setting aside the award within one month. However, the same was filed on 06 th October, 2008. This Court has consistently held that after one month of the passing of the award the Court becomes functus officio and does not have jurisdiction to entertain the application. Reference can be had to the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in case of South Seas Distilleries and Breweries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deepak R. Patne reported in 2003 (3) Bom. L. R. 167 and the judgment in a case of Vasant Govind Sirsekar Vs. Mhatre Pen and Plastic reported in 2005 (3) Mh. L. J. 272 and the judgment in a case of Kiran Machine Tools Vs. D. D. Hinge reported in 2006 (1) Mh. L. J. 286. 4 wp 6035.10 5. In view of the above, the order impugned order does not suffer from any error of jurisdiction. As such, the writ petitions are dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Aug. 11