N.K.Batabyal, J. - (1.) This hearing arises out of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petitioner is a Registered Partnership Firm. The respondent no. 3 was an employee of the said firm. There was an industrial dispute between the employer and the employee and the matter was under adjudication before the Learned 1st Labour Court, West Bengal and was registered as Case No. 29/85 under Section 33(C) (2) of the I.D. Act, 1947. During the pendency of the said proceeding, on 14-1-93, the respondent no. 3 who was the applicant in brat proceeding was absent and the Learned Court was pleased to dismiss the case for default. Thereafter, the respondent no.3 filed a petition for restoration of the case after setting aside the order of dismissal for default on 3-1-94. In that petition, the respondent no. 3 who was the applicant stated that he was deligently conducting the case from 1985 but he was tormented by the acute illness of his wife and his mother from the year 1988 to 1993. He annexed 5 copies of Medical certificates with the said petition. He also stated that in connection with a call by a Match Company of Tamilnadu he went to Tamilnadu to finalise the deal in the last week of December, 1992 and could not return till the 3rd week of January, 1993. As a result of which he could not establish contact with his lawyer on the eve of his departure for Madras. The respondent no. 3 accordingly prayed before the Learned Court for restoration of the case after setting aside the order of dismissal.
(2.) The said application was contested.
(3.) In the objection petition filed on behalf of the writ petitioner/opposite party it was stated that the petition was mis-conceived and not maintainable in law as Rule 27 of the West Bengal Industrial Rules, 1958 had no jurisdiction in the facts and circumstances of the case. It was further submitted that the Labour Court after passing the final order had no power to review the said order of dismissal. It was also stated that the application for restoration was not a bona fide one. The Learned Court after hearing both sides of the impugned order No. 55 dated 17th March, 1994 has been pleased to allow the application for restoration of the case after setting aside the order of dismissal.;