Pradeep Kumar, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) IT has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that an ex parte order for payment of wages under Section 33C(2) of the I.D. Act has been passed directing the petitioner -Company to pay a sum of Rs. 12,775.96 to Yogendra Narain and Rs. 20,876.51 to Mahadeo Ram. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that although there is an order of the court dated 1.10.2004 for fixing the case for ex parte hearing on the ground that the show cause notice has been issued two months earlier and the petitioners have no interest in the case, as no steps have been taken on their behalf. Hence the case was fixed for ex parte hearing and order was passed, which is bad in law. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent -workmen has contested the same and stated that since no step has been taken, ex parte order has been passed.
(3.) AFTER hearing both the parties and going through the records, it appears that LCR was called for only to verify as to whether there has been valid service or not and from the lower court records and the impugned order, it is apparent that the postman or whoever went to deliver the registered notices could not meet, anybody.;