MAHENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-2005-4-16
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on April 05,2005

MAHENDRA SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

VYAS, J. - (1.) THE instant petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned award dated 07. 08. 2001 (Annexure 4) and order dated 21. 11. 2002 (Annexure 6) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that against the termination of his service, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer vide application (Annexure 1 ). The conciliation proceedings failed and failure report on 24. 07. 1999 (Annexure 2) was submitted by the Conciliation Officer to the Appropriate Government. The Appropriate Government made a reference to the Labour Court, Jodhpur vide Notification dated 24. 11. 1999. On reference, notices were issued to the petitioner. On 10. 01. 2001, on behalf of the petitioner, his Counsel put in appearance and sought time to file claim. He continued to appear till 24. 04. 2001, but the claim petition was not filed. Thereafter, on 03. 07. 2001 and 07. 08. 2001, neither the Counsel appeared nor he filed claim petition on behalf of the petitioner, on which the learned Labour Court passed on dispute award on 07. 08. 2001 (Annexure 4 ). After passing the no dispute award dated 07. 08. 2001 (Annexure 4) by the learned Labour Court, 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 dated 21. 11. 2002 (Annexure 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 07. 08. 2001. It has also been submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that for the fault on the part of the counsel for the petitioner, the litigant should not 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. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.