- (1.) The petitioner M/s Jalandhar Coach Builders by way of the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the ex parte award dated 16.7.2004 (Annexure-P.2) passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jalandhar (respondent No. 1). In terms of the impugned award the termination of service of respondent No. 2-workman has been held to be illegal and unjustified. The workman has been held entitled to be reinstated in service with full back wages, continuity of services and all other service benefits.
(2.) The petitioner M/s Jalandhar Coach Builders terminated the service of respondent No. 2 workman. The Act of termination resulted in an industrial dispute which was referred by the State Government for adjudication to the Labour Court, Jalandhar under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('Act' for short). In the statement of claim it was stated by respondent No. 2 workman that he was employed by the petitioner-management as a Fitter on monthly salary and he worked for five years continuously. Thereafter, his services were terminated on 14.8.2000 without any notice, charge-sheet or inquiry due to his trade union activities. The workman served a demand notice to which no reply was given by the petitioner-management. Therefore, it was submitted that the termination of service of the workman was in violation of Sections 25-F and 25-H of the Act. The petitioner-management by an order dated 9.10.2003 passed by the Labour Court was proceeded against ex parte. By an ex parte award, the respondent No. 2 was held entitled to reinstatement in service which is assailed in this petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that it came to know of the ex parte award only after notice dated 18.8.2005 was received from the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Circle-II, Jalandhar (respondent No. 3) with regard to implementation of the ex parte award. The petitioner was summoned to appear before respondent No. 3 on 30.8.2005 (Annexure-P.1). Then the petitioner through its authorized representative inspected the file of the Labour Court, Jalandhar (respondent No. 1) and it was noticed that the order to proceed ex parte against the petitioner was passed on 9.10.2003. It is contended that in fact the petitioner-firm was a sole proprietorship concern of which Sh. Ranjit Singh was the proprietor and he died on 17.2.2001 and thereafter the firm was closed down. It is on account of the ex parte award being passed that the present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-firm through the widow of aforesaid Sh. Ranjit Singh. Therefore, the order passed by the Labour Court (respondent No. 1) is unsustainable in law and is liable to be set aside.;