IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1128 of 2008(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ AATHANKUTTY @ HASSANKUTTY, S/O.MUHAMMAD HAJI, AYYANKULANGARA, KOTTAYI, PALAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.MADHAVAN UNNI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN COMPENSATION (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER), THRISSUR. 2. CHAMI, S/O.LATE MAYAN, RESIDING AT VALIYAPARAMBU HOUSE, ODAMUR, PATALI P.O., PALAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. SRINI, S/O.KARUPPAN, IRUVALAMKADU VEEDU, POONANGAL P.O., MUNDOOR, PALGHAT DISTRICT-678 592. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.1128 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the opposite party in Workmen’s Compensation Case No.365/2000 before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Thrissur. In spite of receipt of notice, the petitioner did not appear before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner and the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner passed Ext.P3 order dated 13.12.2002 directing payment of compensation as computed therein. After 4 years, the petitioner filed an application before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner seeking to set aside the ex-parte award. That was not considered by the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner. Therefore the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.24864/06 before this Court. By Ext.P4 judgment, this Court took a lenient view and directed the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner to consider and pass appropriate orders on petition to set aside the ex-part order on condition that the petitioner deposits an amount awarded within one month from the date of that judgment namely, 3.10.06. W.P.(c) No.1128/08 2 Pursuant thereto, the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner took up the matter for consideration. The matter was posted to 27.10.06 on which day the same was postponed to 10.11.06. On 10.11.06, the opposite party had not still deposited the amount as directed in Ext.P4 judgment. Therefore, the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, in accordance with Ext.P4 judgment passed Ext.P6 order rejecting the application. The petitioner is now challenging Ext.P6 order. 2. This Court was lenient enough to grant the petitioner an opportunity to contest the matter on merits on certain conditions. The petitioner has not availed of that opportunity by complying with the conditions. He has not even chosen to file an application in that writ petition seeking extension of time to comply with the conditions therein. As such I do not find anything wrong with Ext.P6 order. I do not also think that the workman in question should be dragged to this Court further in pursuit of an expensive litigation which that workman can ill-afford. Therefore I am not inclined to exercise my extra-ordinary, discretionary jurisdiction under W.P.(c) No.1128/08 3 Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner. Hence the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd