Basic Education Officer, Lucknow vs The Presiding Officer, Labour ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6322 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 11983 of 2021
 
Petitioner :- Basic Education Officer, Lucknow
 
Respondent :- The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Lucknow & Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Tripathi,learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no.5.

The order passed by the labour court impugned herein under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is questioned on a limited ground that the labour court while adjudicating upon the claim has proceeded ex-parte and without any notice to the petitioner.

It is submitted that the impugned order itself does not indicate any particular date on which the notice was issued and thereafter as to when the service of notice was refused by the petitioner. The order passed by the labour court concededly is ex-parte.

Sri Ashish Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.5 has argued that legally the benefit of leave encashment is admissible to the clerical staff working in Basic Shiksha Parishad and the claim is fortified under a judgment passed by this court. The position of law is disputed by the petitioner.

Be that as it may, the question before this Court is limited to the denial of opportunity to the petitioner. Prima-facie, this Court is satisfied that the matter was proceeded ex-parte without sufficient notice, therefore, the petitioner stood prevented from due participation in the proceedings.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this Court to Rule 16 of the U.P. Industrial Dispute Rules, 1957 whereunder as against an order passed ex-parte, an application for recall would be maintainable within a period of ten days. This period of limitation has already run out.

On a close scrutiny of the record,it appears to be a case of denial of fair opportunity and the cause shown is sufficient.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that the rule of opportunity is fundamental to any such proceedings, it is provided that if the petitioner makes an application for setting aside the ex-parte order within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be decided by the labour court on merit expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months. The petitioner undertakes to be present in the case without fail.

Since the matter has been remitted to the labour court, the recovery proceedings in the meantime shall remain in abeyance and shall abide by the outcome of the application for recall of order or the final order in the case on merit, as the case may be.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Order Date :- 16.6.2021

Shahnaz