VYAS, J. - (1.) THE instant petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned award dtd. 7. 8. 2001 (Annex. 4) and order dtd. 21. 11. 2002 (Annex. 6) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that against the termination of his services, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer vide application dtd. 21. 4. 1999. The conciliation proceedings failed and failure report was submitted by the conciliation officer to the Appropriate Government. The appropriate Government made a reference to the Labour Court, Jodhpur vide notification dtd. 24. 11. 1999. On reference, notices were issued to the petitioner. On 10. 1. 2001, on behalf of the petitioner his counsel put in appearance and sought time to file claim. He continued to appear till 24. 4. 2001, but the claim petition was not filed. Thereafter on 3. 7. 2001 and 7. 8. 2001, neither the counsel appeared nor he filed claim petition on behalf of the petitioner, on which the learned Labour Court passed no dispute award on 7. 8. 2001 (Annex. 4 ). After passing of no dispute award dtd. 7. 8. 2001, the counsel for the petitioner submitted an application under Section 11-A of the Act of 1947 for restoration of the claim case. The learned Labour Court vide order dtd. 21. 11. 2002 (Annex. 6) rejected the application filed by the petitioner.
(3.) IN the instant petition, the main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the counsel for the petitioner was operated for his disease in his teeth and the doctor has advised him to take rest. Therefore, the counsel for the petitioner could not appear before the Labour Court on 7. 8. 2001. It has also been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that for the fault on the part of the petitioner, the litigant should no be made to suffer. None appeared for the respondents despite service. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and scanned and examined the material on record. ;