- (1.) In this petition under Art. 228 of the Constitution, the petitioner wants that the order dated 8-3-1967 passed by tt appellate authority, dismissing the petitioner's appeal as incompetent, be quashed.
(2.) The petitioner owns and runs a power loom factory at Hathras for the manufacture of coarse and medium cloth. As required by the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 , the petitioner submitted to the Certifying Officer draft standing orders for adoption in the petitioner's industrial establishment. On 3-1-1966, the representatives of the workmen accepted the revised draft of the standing orders submitted by the petitioner except the clause regarding festival holidays. After hearing the parties, namely, the petitioner Company and its workmen, the Certifying Officer approved the Standing Orders by his order dated 8th November, 1966, but changed the draft standing orders in so far as it related to the festival holidays and provided for six days' festival holidays with full wages. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 6 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. The memorandum of appeal sent by post and was received in the office of the appellate authority on 9-12-1966. 0 13th December, 1966, the appellate authority informed the petitioner that the appeal filed by the petitioner was defective in several respects. The number of section, under which the appeal was preferred, was wrongly stated in the memorandum of appea The original Standing Orders, as certified by the Certifying Officer, had not been enclosed, nor spare copies thereof had been sent. The petitioner was directed to remove these defects and was informed that the appeal would be entertained on removal the above noted defects. On 20th December, 1968, the petitioner sent the original Standing Orders along with the requisite spare copies, and also clarified the matter about the section, under which the appes was preferred. The appeal appears to have been entertained and registered. Notices of dates fixed in the case were given to the concerned parties.
(3.) On the date fixed for the hearing of the case, the workmen took a preliminary objection that the appeal was incompetent and barred by time. The period of limitation was 30 days and it expired prior to the removal of the defects. The non-submission of the authenticated copies of the Certified Standing Orders went to the root of the matter and without it, the memorandum of appeal could not be treated as duly presented within time.;