- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent nos. 4 to 7 Keshar Singh, Sigaru, Mangal Singh and Phool Singh.
(2.) This writ petition by the employer is directed against restoration order dated 22.4.1998 passed in Adjudication case no.190 of 1988 by presiding officer labour court Dehradun (which at the time was in U.P. and now in Uttarakhand). The registered office and factory of the employer which is a company is situate at Deoband, District Saharanpur which is in U.P. Through the said order ex-parte award dated 7.5.1997 based on settlement, was set aside. The matter which was referred to the labour court was as to whether the action of petitioner employer terminating the services of 52 of its workmen whose names were given in the referring order was just and valid or not. The 52 workmen authorised five persons among themselves to represent their case i.e. Santu, respondent no.3 and respondent no.4 to 7. Out of the 52 affected workmen, Santu alone entered into settlement on 6.5.1997 with the employer and on the basis of that award was given on 7.5.1997 by the labour court. The settlement did not contain the signatures of any other old workman not even of respondent no. 4 to 7. The Presiding Officer of the labour court through award dated 7.5.1997 held that the settlement was quite appropriate hence he accepted the same and gave the award in terms of the settlement.
(3.) In the award dated 7.5.1997 there is absolutely no mention that what was the settlement. Thereafter, restoration application was filed on behalf of all the workmen by respondent nos. 4 to 7 which was allowed by the impugned order dated 22.4.1998 and award dated 7.5.1997 was treated to be ex parte against all the workman accept Santu and was set aside and dates were fixed for different stages of the hearing.;