Case: BUNDI ZILA PETROL PUMP DEALERS ASSOCIATION BUNDI Vs. SANYOJAK BUNDI ZILA PETROL MAZDR.SANGH (B.M.S.)

2. A few facts need mention hereinbelow in brief tose appeals.3. On 26.07.1989, the State Government made a referenceof the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal, Kota for deciding the following disputes which read asthe demands raised in the demand lettersPump Mazdoorer, MaheshwariCorporation, District Bundi, are just and valid?If yes, to what reliefs the workmen are entitled to? DEMANDS1. Thent which has beenamount whichid by the Management, whichbe treated as deferred wages and paid to the workmenia payment and this difference should be more% of thebeing received by the workmen;2. Alldays casual leaves in a year.3. 11ery yearfestivals. Threebe paidto the workmenfor work taken from them in the year 1986 on such holidays;4. Workmen should be designated/defined accordingly to their nature of work, i.e., skilled,so thatto their category;5. All the workmen be given annual salary increments;6. Allthe workmen be givenin accordance withprice index;7. All workmenof theirpay towards rent allowance;8. Freebe provided to all the workmenal allowance be given to them;9. Provident Fund Scheme be prepared for thede accordingly;10. Education Fee be given to workmen for studies1. At least two cotton uniformsand one woolen uniform every two years, theIndustrial Tribunal, Kotathe reference on meritsin respondents favour. It is, however, not in dispute that the Industrial Tribunal decided the reference ex parte against the appellant. In Para 4 of the award,the Tribunal noted that the appellant(respondentear despite notice served on them and hence they are proceeded ex parte.5. Theof thed, filed the writ petition in the HighNo. 5294/1996. By order datedle Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the award.6. The, felt aggrieved and filed writ appeal (No.449/1999) before the Division Benchgh Court. By impugnedthe Division Benchallowed the respondents appeal and setof theThe impugned order was passed ind for thebefore theDivision Bench when the appeal was heard. Aggrieved by the saidnt filed the review petition, which was dismissed bythe Division Benchgh Court.7. Against the orders passed by the High Court in thethe review petition,the appellant has filed the present appeals by way of special leave appeal in this Court.

Reasoning:
he parties and on perusalof thecase including the written submission filed on behalf of respondent, we are inclined to allow the appeals, set aside the impugned order and also set aside the ex parte awardthe Industrial Tribunaland remand the case tothe Industrial Tribunalfor deciding the reference onn accordance withlaw after affording an opportunity to both the parties.9. The reasons for remand are not far to seek. First, it is not in dispute that the appellant did not get any opportunity to contest the referencee Industrial Tribunaland had to suffer adverse award ex parte;se shown for their absencee Industrial Tribunalconstitutes a sufficient cause and entitles the appellant to claim an opportunity to contestthe reference onThird, we find that this is not a case where the appellante the Tribunalproceeded ex parte.In other words, sincethe appellant did not get any opportunity to contest thematter because they did not have any knowledges; Fourth, every party to a lis has a right to contest the case on merits, of course, subject to certainw. However, so far as the appellants case is concerned no such exception is noticed, which may disentitle them to contestthe reference onand lastly, substantial justice demands that having regard to theof reference, both the parties to the lis are entitled for an opportunity to contest the case on the merits.