* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C.) No. 4324/1998
% Date of Decision: 30th July, 2009
# Smt. Chanchal Kumari ..... Petitioner
! Through: Mr. Shishir Mathur, Advocate.
VERSUS
$ Government of NCT of Delhi and Another .....Respondent
^ Through: Ms. Deepa Tiwari, Adv. for Respondent no.1 and Mr. M.Y. Khan, Adv. for Respondent no.2.
CORAM:
Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL
1. Whether reporters of Local paper may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?NO S.N.AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) The petitioner, Smt. Chanchal Kumari, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by an ex parte award dated 09.03.1995 in ID No. 718/94 (old ID No. 89/79 and 1207/83). Vide impugned award, the Labour Court has held that no industrial dispute survives which needs adjudication as nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner before the Labour Court to prove her claim.
2. The petitioner has raised an industrial dispute with regard to her termination from the service of the management (respondent no. 2 herein) w.e.f 19.07.1977.
3. As nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner, the reference was disposed of by the Labour Court vide impugned award stating that no industrial dispute survives which requires adjudication.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends W.P.(C) No. 4324/1998 Page 1 of 2 that on the date the reference was disposed of by the Labour Court in default of non-appearance of the petitioner, the petitioner could not appear before the Labour Court because she had missed a date of hearing. The petitioner, therefore, wants an opportunity to prove that her alleged termination by the management of respondent no. 2 was illegal and unjustified. Since the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner with regard to her termination has not been adjudicated by the Court below on merits, the interest of justice requires that adjudication should take place on merits instead of rejecting the claim of the petitioner on technical grounds.
5. In view of the above and having regard to the facts of the case and the submissions made by counsel for the parties, the impugned award dated 09.03.1995 is hereby set aside. Consequent thereto, the order dated 05.02.1998 by which the application of the petitioner for recall of ex parte award dated 09.03.1995 was dismissed is also set aside. The case is remanded back to the Labour Court/successor court for adjudication of reference on merits. The parties are directed to appear before the Court below for necessary directions at 2 PM on 07.08.2009.
6. Needless to say that the Court below shall make an endeavour to decide the reference as expeditiously as possible preferably within one year from today keeping in mind that the alleged termination of the petitioner from the service of respondent no. 2 management dates back to 1977.
7. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of.
JULY 30, 2009 S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'ma'
W.P.(C) No. 4324/1998 Page 2 of 2