- (1.) THE workman had moved an application under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for paying current wages to the petitioner from the date of the application, i. e. April 15, 1992. With the consent of the parties, I have heard them in the main case also and propose to dispose of the main case itself.
(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1, Shri Sube Singh (hereinafter called the workman) was working as work-charged Fitter with the petitioner (hereinafter called the Management), i. e. Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, Haryana with effect from January 1, 1982 (Annexure P2 ). The workman raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court, Rohtak for adjudication by the State Government, vide Notification dated September 16, 1992.
(3.) THE Labour Court, Rohtak issued notice to the Management on September 24, 1982 for appearing before it on October 19, 1992 regarding the dispute between the parties. The registered A. D. envelope which has sent to the Management, was received back with the report of the Postal Authorities "refused to take delivery". On October 19, 1982, the Labour Court, on the basis of the report of the Postal Authorities on the registered A D. envelope, passed the order for proceeding ex-parte against the Management. On the same day, i. e. October 19, 1982, the Sub Divisional Officer, who had been authorised on behalf of the Management to appear in the case, moved an application to set aside the ex-parte order. In the application it was mentioned that he had reached the Court at 9. 00 A. M. and he kept on sitting outside the Court Room till 10. 45 A. M. and when he entered the Court Room and enquired about the case, the Reader of the Court told him that ex parte orders had been passed. It has further been mentioned in the application that the case had not been called for hearing and the absence of the applicant, i. e. the Management was not intentional. No orders have been passed on this application nor any notice was issued of this application to the workman. I find from the record, which was summoned by me from the Labour Court, that on November 9, 1982, a communication was addressed by the Executive Engineer on behalf of the Management to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rohtak, intimating the Court that Shri. P. K. Vasudeva, Sub Divisional Officer had attended Labour Court about the hearing of the case, he was told that ex parte decision had been taken. It is further mentioned in this communication that an application had been submitted to the Court against the ex parte order on the same day and that the ex-parte decision would not be acceptable to the Management. This communication was received by the Labour Court on November 16, 1982 and the same has been attached as Annexure P-9 to the present writ petition. The Labour Court on October 19, 1982 fixed December 14, 1982 for ex parte evidence of the workman, at Hissar. On December 14, 1982, the case was adjourned to January 11, 1983 on the request of the workman. No one had appeared on behalf of the Management even on that date. The ex-parte evidence of the workman was recorded on January 11, 1983 in the absence of any representative of the Management, and ultimately, the award was made on February 5, 1983 (Annexure P-l ). The Motion Bench, while admitting the writ petition on August 12, 1983 stayed the operation of the impugned award;