IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 5505 of 2004(E)
1. PULIYILA HANDLOOM SANGHAM NO. 3337,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.SOMAN, NANJU BHAVANAM,
... Respondent
2. THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM)
For Respondent :SRI.RAJU JOSEPH, ADDL.SC.,KSFE LTD.
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :23/03/2007
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
--------------------------
W.P.(C)NO.5505 OF 2004
-------------------------
DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF MARCH, 2007
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the management in I.D.No.56/01 before the
Industrial Tribunal, Kollam. They are challenging Ext.P6 award in that
I.D. Ext.P6 is an ex-parte award. Their contention is that before
passing this award, the workman was set ex-parte and he filed an
application to set aside the ex-parte order, in respect of which the
management had no notice. Since Ext.P6 award has been passed after
setting aside the ex-parte order against the workman, without notice
to the management, Ext.P6 award is vitiated, is the submission made
by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Learned Counsel for the workman submits that even before
the workman was set ex-parte, the management had already been set
ex-parte and therefore when the petitioner filed an application to set
aside the ex-parte order against him, there is no question of serving
copy of the application to set aside the ex-parte order against the
workman on the management. On that ground , the learned counsel
for the workman stoutly supports Ext.P6 award.
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
W.P.(c)No.5505/04 2
Admittedly Ext.P6 award is an ex-parte award. Both sides were not
very diligent in prosecuting their cases and both were set ex-parte.
The workman filed an application to set aside the ex-parte
admittedly without serving copy to the management. In such
circumstances, I am not satisfied that the Tribunal had done the
right thing in setting aside the ex-parte order against the workman
alone and passing the award without any notice to the
management. In any event, since both the parties were negligent
in the matter of prosecuting their cases, it is only appropriate that
the matter to be adjudicated on merits after affording an
opportunity of being heard to both sides.
4. Accordingly, I set aside Ext.P6 award and remand the
matter to the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam for fresh adjudication. The
Industrial Tribunal, Kollam shall take back I.D.No.56/01 on files and
dispose of the I.D. afresh after affording an opportunity to adduce
evidence to both sides and after hearing both sides. The parties
shall appear before the Tribunal on 4.6.07. The Tribunal shall try to
dispose of the matter without any further delay, since the dispute is
of the year 2001.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Acd
W.P.(c)No.5505/04 3