Court No. - 6 Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 550 of 2010 Petitioner :- Dhyan Singh Respondent :- The State Of U.P.Through Secy. Labour Deptt. Lko.And Ors. Petitioner Counsel :- Suresh Chandra Mishra,Om Prakash Yadav Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C,Jitendra Saxena Hon'ble Shabihul Hasnain,J.
Heard Sri Suresh Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Jitendra Saxena for opposite party No.2.
Petitioner has challenged the award dated 15.2.2007 as well as the order
dated 23.10.2009. Case of the petitioner is that both the orders are ex-parte
orders. This happened because earlier the Court of Industrial Tribunal-II was
lying vacant therefore the petitioner and the counsel both could not appear
and address the correct facts before the Court and the Court proceeded ex-
parte. Petitioner is a poor person and in the difficult financial conditions and
he should be given fresh chance to appear before the Court again and present
his grievance.
Sri Jitendra Saxena has vehemently opposed all the contentions of the
petitioner counsel and says that the petitioner has not even annexed the order-
sheet to prove the point that the posts were vacant. Secondly, the recall
application does not contain the reasons for the delay of moving a recall
application. Thirdly, the contentions of petitioner’s written statement have
been duly considered by the Court. Accordingly, nothing remains for fresh
decision. Further, Sri Jitendra Saxena says that his argument is not covered by
the Industrial Disputes Act. But this question has also not not been
satisfactorily dealt with by the Industrial Tribunal and the fact that the
petitioner is a poor person and the Court was not available earlier due to
which neither the petitioner nor the counsel appeared before the Court and
this order was passed.
In the interest of justice and equity this Court feels that the petitioner may be
given one more chance to present his case before the authorities.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The order dated 23.10.2009 as well as
the award dated 15.2.2007 are hereby quashed. The case is remanded back to
the opposite party No.2 for adjudication afresh after giving proper opportunity
to both the parties.
Order Date :- 4.2.2010
RKM.