IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 83 of 2009 -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.NO.13677/2002 DATED 19/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT/ 1ST RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- N.RAVEENDRAN, PROPRIETOR, S.N.R PEELING SHED, PALLANA PO., KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.HARILAL SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MONY AMMA, PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLANA.P.O., THRIKKUNNAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE SECRETARY, MERCHANTILE WORKERS UNION, REG.NO.447/75 (INTUC) KALLUMOOD KAYAMKULAM. 3. LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. MEERA, ADV. SRI. N. REGHURAJ. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, ALONG WITH W.A. NO. 173/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. J.B. Koshy,Ag.C.J. & V. Giri, J. ---------------------------------------- W.A. Nos. 83 & 173 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 Judgment Koshy, Ag.C.J. Writ petitioner was a worker in the peeling shed owned by the first respondent in Writ Appeal No.83 of 2009. An industrial dispute was raised contending that petitioner was denied employment by the respondent management. Ext.P6 award was passed stating that union was declared exparte and, therefore, there was abandonment of the claim. A petition to set aside the award was filed with delay. The delay was condoned. Later, award was passed. Ext.P6 award was set aside after condoning the delay in the petition to set aside the exparte order. Ext.P6 award was published in the Gazette on 26.3.1996. Management filed a writ petition stating that after 30 days of the publication of the award, it cannot be set aside as it has become final and Labour Court has become functus officio in view of section 17 of the Act. Therefore, the workman challenged the award itself on merit. The learned single allowed both the writ petitions. Management has filed this appeal. Ext.P6 award is not an award at all. It has been held that W.A. Nos.83 & 173/2009 2 when a matter is referred for adjudication, Labour Court is bound to pass an award and it cannot dismiss the case for default or merely because one party is absent. From the available evidence, award has to be passed. If union is absent and management is present, management has to file statement and then file an affidavit to prove the contentions and then pass the award. Case of the workman is that union can also file statement and evidence and from the evidence, it is for the Tribunal to pass an award. Reference by the State Government should be answered by the court on merits. Therefore, Ext.P6 is not at all an award. In any event, even if the court cannot set aside the award after 30 days of the publication of the award, the award itself is challenged by the workman and nonest award was rightly set aside by the Court. We do not understand why the management has filed an appeal. The management should not have filed an appeal and dragged the poor workman. Therefore, both appeals are dismissed with cost of Rs.2,000/-. J.B.Koshy Acting Chief Justice V. Giri Judge vaa