B.L. Yadav, J. - (1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the employer U.P. State Sugar Corporation, is directed against the orders dated June 8, 1992, and dated February 2, 1993 (Annexures 6 and 8 respectively) to the petition.
(2.) The 'workman, respondent No. 2 made an application for reinstatement under Section 2-A of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short the Act), but the same was time barred. The explanation was furnished for the delay and a prayer was made that the delay may be condoned and the application may be treated to be within time and the matter may be decided on merits. The Conciliation Officer by order dated June 8, 1992 treated the cause to be sufficient and condoned the delay. Against that order the petitioner prefered a review application and the same was dismissed by order dated February 6, 1993, holding that there was no provision for review.
(3.) Sri H.S. Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner, laid great emphasis that no finding: was recorded about the sufficient cause in the impugned order, and consequently there was no justification for condonation of delay, and each day's delay was not explained. He placed reliance on Sita Ram Ram Charan and Ors. v. M.N. Nagrashana Authority under the Payment of Wages Act for Ahmedabad Area and Ors. (1960-I-LLJ-29) and Bharat Barrel and Drum Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Bharat Barrel Employees Union. (1987-I-LLJ-492);