Gujarat High Court High Court

L vs Learned on 16 December, 2010

Gujarat High Court
L vs Learned on 16 December, 2010
Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/12522/2010	 4/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12522 of
2010 
 
=========================================================

 

L
N K COLLEGE OF EDUCATION - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

LEARNED
PRESIDING OFFICER & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
SHIVANIRAJPUROHIT
for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, 
MR H.S.MULIA for
Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 16/12/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

The
petitioner, an educational institution, has filed this petition
under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for
quashing and setting aside the order dated 20.03.2010, passed by the
Presiding Officer in Miscellaneous Application No.52/2008 in
Reference (L.C.K.) No.2/2003, seeking restoration of the said
reference.

This
Court has passed an order on 28th September, 2010. While
issuing the notice, the Court has observed therein that the
restoration application can be allowed subject to payment of
reasonable cost so as to give an opportunity to the petitioner to
submit their case on merits. On service of notice Mr. H.S. Mulia,
learned advocate appears on behalf of the respondent No.2.

Having
heard the learned counsel Mr. Amit M. Panchal with Ms. Shivani
Rajpurohit for the petitioner and Mr. H.S. Mulia learned advocate
appearing for the respondent No.2, the Court is of the view that
impugned award, passed by the Labour Court was an ex-parte award and
restoration application moved by the petitioner, was rejected on the
ground that the petitioner has shown its negligence and despite
service of notice, the petitioner could not remain present or lead
any evidence. It, however, appears from the award that the award
was not passed on merits. Hence, in the interest of justice and
considering the fact that the petitioner should be given a
reasonable opportunity to present its case before the Labour Court,
the impugned order passed by the Labour Court on 20.03.2010, is
hereby quashed and set aside and Misc. Application filed by the
petitioner for restoration of the reference is hereby allowed. The
resultant effect is that the ex-parte award passed by the Labour
court in Reference (L.C.K.) No.2/2003 is quashed and set aside and
it will have to be decided on merits after giving an opportunity of
being heard and leading evidence in that reference.

It
is, however, clarified that the petitioner is required to be saddled
with cost which is quantified at Rs.5,000/-. The petitioner is,
therefore, directed to pay the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent
No.2 over and above cost of Rs.5,00/- which was awarded by the
Labour Court if not paid so far. On payment of this amount, the
reference will be restored and it would be taken up for adjudication
by the Labour Court.

Since
the reference is of 2003, the Labour Court is directed to decide the
reference as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period
of six months from the date of receipt of the writ or from the date
of receipt of certified copy of this order, whichever is earlier.
Parties are expected to co-operate to the Labour Court in early
disposal of the reference.

With
these directions and observations, this petitions is accordingly
allowed to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

(K.A.

PUJ, J.)

Pankaj

   

Top