R.B. Misra, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the writ petition are that the respondent No. 2 was appointed as a daily wager from 26.3.88 to 28.2.90 on the post of mate. He was deployed to render assistance in construction work and when the same was over the service of the daily wager respondent No. 2 was dispensed with effect from 1.3.90. The respondent No. 2 being aggrieved raised an industrial dispute and the Adjudication Case No. 172 of 1992 was registered for : "Whether the termination of the services of the labour Sri Ishaq son of Babloo Khan, mate by the employer is just and legal : If not, then to what relief the concerned labour is entitled to get and with which detail? "
(3.) The labour court on 31.3.1994, passed an ex-parte award holding that no body appeared for and on behalf of the petitioner employer, despite the full knowledge of the proceedings of the case ultimately labour court set aside termination of the respondent No. 2 reinstated with full back wages. An affidavit along-with an application against the ex-parte award was filed on behalf of petitioner on 27.5.94 which too was dismissed by labour court on 8.4.96, even the execution proceedings were initiated for recovery of the money awarded. Being aggrieved by the orders dated 31.3.94 and 8.4.96 the State or U.P. the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.;