Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. Thru Divisional ... vs Rangi Lal And Another on 11 May, 2023
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101798
Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 43205 of 2002
Petitioner :- State Of U.P. Thru Divisional Director And Another
Respondent :- Rangi Lal And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- S.C.
Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,Prabhakar Dubey,S.K. Srivastava
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Neeraj Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-workman.
2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that a claim was preferred by the respondent-workman with regard to his disengagement from service which has been adjudicated by the Labour Court, Gorakhpur in Labour Dispute No. 139 of 1993, which has been allowed by judgment and award dated 14.05.1998. It is submitted that in the reference made to the Labour Court, Gorakhpur reference was with regard to the disengagement of respondent-workman namely Rangilal S/o Sanchit who has been terminated from service on 01.09.1989 and whether he is entitled for the reliefs claimed for.
3. It seems that notices were issued to the petitioners and no representation was made by petitioners before the Labour Court and consequently the proceedings continued ex-parte against petitioner culminating in the impugned award dated 14.05.1998.
4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that on coming to know about the said award, the petitioner has moved an application for setting aside ex-parte award alongwith an application for condonation of delay on 10.10.2000, which remained pending with the Labour Court and in the meanwhile the respondent-workman moved appropriate application for execution of the award dated 14.05.1998, in pursuance to which orders were passed for execution of the award on 25.08.2002, which order also also been imugned in the present writ petition.
5. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no notices were received by them and the Labour Court has proceeded ex-parte in illegal and arbitrary manner without even considering basic issues ought to have been considered. It is submitted that neither petitioner is an industry nor the respondent-workman completed 240 days in one calendar year and the impugned award is liable to be set aside.
6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent-workman has opposed the writ petition and has submitted that despite notices having been issued, the petitioners failed to appear before the Labour Court and consequently, considering the material available on record the Labour Court has passed the impugned award and there is no infirmity in the same.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. From the perusal of record it is evident that the Labour Court has proceeded ex-parte while passing the award dated 14.05.1998. The petitioner has moved an application for setting aside ex-parte award which was pending before the Labour Court at the time of filing of present writ petition and in the present writ petition also the petitioner has prayed for quashing of impugned award dated 14.05.1998 published on 20.11.1998.
9. It is noticed that for the same relief prayed in the present writ petition, an application for setting aside ex-parte award was also filed before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur. It is settled law that for same relief proceedings cannot be initiated simultaneously before two Courts and undoubtedly at the time when present writ petitioner was filed, application for setting aside ex-parte award was pending before the Labour Court. Neither in the present writ petition nor in the pleadings filed subsequently before this Court, is there any information about fate of the application for setting aside ex-parte award. In case application is pending then this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not interfere in such matter till application for setting aside ex-parte award is decided by the Labour Court.
10. It has further been informed that as an interim measure this Court passed following order on 09.10.2002 :
"Sri S.K. Srivastava has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 1. He prays for and is granted a month's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within a week thereafter.
List in the week commencing 25.11.2002.
The contention of the petitioner is that the award was passed exparte on 14.05.1998 and an application for setting aside the said award is pending. Meanwhile, the recovery proceedings have been initiated.
If the petitioner deposits the entire amount pursuant to the order dated 25.08.2002 within thirty days from today before the respondent no. 2, the operation of the impugned order shall be kept in a separate account and shall not be paid to the respondent no. 1. In the event of default in complying with the aforesaid conditions, this interim order shall stands discharged and the authority shall recover the amount."
11. In the light of above, this Court is of the considered view that present writ petition challenging the award would not be maintainable during pendency of application for setting aside ex-parte award pending before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur.
12. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no. 2 - The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gorakhpur to proceed to consider and decide application for setting aside ex-parte award, if not already decided, expeditiously, say within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, after hearing all the parties concerned, in accordance with law, and the money deposited in pursuance of the interim order of this Court shall be adjusted while passing the final order.
13. In case the application has already been decided then the petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps to assail the said order alongwith the impugned award. In case application for setting aside ex-parte award has already been dismissed, the money deposited by the petitioner before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur, same shall be released in favour of respondent-workman on his moving suitable application before the Labour Court, Gorakhpur.
Order Date :- 11.5.2023
A. Verma
(Alok Mathur, J.)
