ANJANI KUMAR, J. - (1.) BY means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,1950 petitioner -employer challenges the award of the Industrial Tribunal (4), U.P., Agra dated 4th April, 1997 passed in adjudication case No. 249 of 1996, Annexure -1 to the writ petition.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and have gone through the award. A perusal whereof demonstrates that the following was the reference made by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal (4), U.P., Agra, hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal', for adjudication : .........[vernacular ommited text]........... The Tribunal has recorded a finding that on receipt of the reference, a case was registered and notices were sent to the parties by registered post. On the date fixed i.e. on 24 -1 -1997, the workman concerned has put in appearance and filed his authority along with an application praying therein that he may be granted time till next date fixed for filing the written statement. But on that date, namely, on 24 -1 -1997 nobody appeared on behalf of the employer, nor the employer themself appeared. On the next date i.e. on 3 -3 -1997, the workman filed his written statement along with an affidavit and employer remain absent on that date also when the employer had notice of the proceedings, therefore, on 3 -3 -1997 in order to proceed ex -parte the next date was fixed 13 -3 -1997. But on the next date i.e. on 13 -3 -1997, again nobody has appeared on behalf of the employer. The Tribunal, therefore, considered the case on merit and has found that the workman concerned who was employed on 1 -9 -1992 and continued to service with the employer till 7 -8 -1995 when his serviced were terminated and that he has not been paid his wages for the period from 4 -3 -1995 to 7 -8 -1995 and further that before terminating his services the provisions of Section 6 -N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', have not been complied with.
(3.) THE Tribunal after considering the material evidence on record have come to the conclusion and recorded a finding that the workman concerned has worked for more than 240 days on the previous day i.e. on 7 -8 -1995 when his services were terminated by the employer without complying with the provision of Section 6 -N of the Act. The Tribunal has further found that the employer have put in appearance on 13 -3 -1997 only and application for setting aside the ex -parte award has been filed on 29 -3 -1997 and 1 -4 -1997, but the employer remain absent and have not pressed even the application for setting aside the ex -parte award dated 13 -3 -1997. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal has rejected the applications for setting aside the award moved by the employer and maintained the award dated 13 -3 -1997 holding that the services of the workman were arbitrarily and illegally terminated and that the workman concerned is entitled for re -instatement with full back wages with continuity of service. It is this order/award, which is under challenge before this Court by the employer.;