CWP No. 6332 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 6332 of 2009 Date of decision: 04.05.2010 Mohan Lal son of Bhudev ...... PETITIONER VERSUS Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon, District Gurgaon and another ....... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present writ petition is for setting aside of the order dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-5), vide which the ex-parte proceedings were initiated against the petitioner-workman and the order dated 02.03.2009 (Annexure P-7), vide which the application moved by the petitioner-workman for setting aside of the ex-parte proceedings has been dismissed by the learned Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon. CWP No. 6332 of 2009 2 Counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute was raised by the petitioner of which reference was made to the Labour Court. The learned Labour Court proceeded against the petitioner-workman ex-parte on 24.04.2007 and passed an ex-parte Award. The petitioner filed CWP No. 13482 of 2007 in this Court. This Court, vide order dated 17.09.2008, set aside the ex-parte order as well as the Award and directed the parties to appear before the Labour Court on 10.11.2008 for conducting further proceedings in accordance with law. In compliance with the order passed by this Court, the petitioner through his Authorized Representative appeared before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 10.11.2008. The case was not listed before the Court and in support of this contention, the cause list of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon has been placed on record as Annexure P-3. He contends that as the case was not listed, the petitioner and his Authorized Representative were not aware of the case having been taken up for hearing. On 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner moved an application before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon for summoning the file of the case in compliance with the directions issued by the High Court. On moving this application, the petitioner-workman came to know that he has been proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-5). Thereafter, he moved an application dated 22.12.2008, which was the date fixed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon for filing written statement and documents by the Management. The said application was taken up for hearing and decided by the Labour Court vide order dated 02.03.2009 (Annexure P-7), vide which the said application has been dismissed primarily on the ground that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing his case but is using the forum for exerting CWP No. 6332 of 2009 3 undue pressure for getting some money from the opposite party. The petitioner is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits and his aim is to keep the litigation pending for some ulterior motive. Counsel for the petitioner submits that these observations made by the Labour Court are totally uncalled for. The facts are apparent and, therefore, the Court below should have taken into consideration the submissions made by the petitioner and set aside the ex-parte proceedings initiated against him. He, on this basis, prays for setting aside of the impugned orders dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-5) and 02.03.2009 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon. On the other hand, counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that the conduct of the petitioner-workman itself shows that the workman had been callous in his approach in pursuing his own case. Initially, ex-parte proceedings were initiated against him leading to the passing of the ex- parte Award, which the petitioner had challenged in this Court and this Court was pleased to set aside the ex-parte proceedings and Award and directed the parties to appear before the Labour Court on 10.11.2008. On the said date, the petitioner or his Authorized Representative failed to appear before the Labour Court and, therefore, the Labour Court had no option but to pass an order initiating ex-parte proceedings against him. The application, which was moved by the petitioner for summoning the case file dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-4) does not show that the petitioner had appeared before the Labour Court on 10.11.2008. His further contention is that in his application dated 22.12.2008 for setting aside of the ex-parte order dated 10.11.2008, the petitioner has not taken the plea which he is taking in the present case before this Court. On a specific question put by this Court as to whether the cause list (Annexure P-3) placed on record by CWP No. 6332 of 2009 4 the petitioner in the present writ petition is correct or not, counsel for respondent No. 2, on written instructions from his client, very fairly states that the said cause list is correct. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The facts are not in dispute. CWP No. 13482 of 2007 preferred by the petitioner for setting aside of the ex-parte proceedings and the ex-parte Award was allowed by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2008. The parties were directed to appear before the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court on 10.11.2008 for conducting further proceeding in accordance with law. According to the assertion of the petitioner, he had appeared before the Labour Court through his Authorized Representative but the case was not listed. The petitioner moved an application on 12.11.2008 for summoning the file of the case in compliance with the order passed by this Court on 10.11.2008 in the writ petition preferred by him. It is then that the petitioner came to know that the case was taken up for hearing by the learned Labour Court on 10.11.2008 and the petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte. Order dated 10.11.2008 clearly indicates that the case was adjourned to 22.12.2008 for filing written statement and documents by the Management. On 22.12.2008, the petitioner moved an application for setting aside of the ex-parte proceedings. The said application was dismissed by the Labour Court vide order dated 02.03.2009 on the ground that the petitioner was not interested in pursuing his case but was only interested in putting pressure on the other side in order to extract money. The observations made by the Labour Court are imaginary. The facts speak for themselves. The case was not listed before the Labour Court on 10.11.2008, as is apparent from the cause CWP No. 6332 of 2009 5 list for 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-3) of the Labour Court. The cause list has been found to be correct and the counsel for respondent No. 2 has very fairly stated that the case of the petitioner was not listed on the said date. If that be so, the petitioner had a reasonable explanation for his non- appearance before the Court when the case was taken up for hearing at 3 P.M. The application dated 12.11.2008 preferred by the petitioner for summoning the case file further shows the intention of the petitioner to pursue the matter in all earnest. The application for setting aside of the ex- parte order dated 10.11.2008 was thus in bona-fide exercise of his right by giving a reasonable explanation for his non-appearance before the Court. Accordingly, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-5) and 02.03.2009 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Gurgaon are hereby set aside. ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE May 04, 2010 pj