JUDGMENT

KURIAN, J.:

Leave granted.

2. The question arising for consideration in this case is whether the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court is functus officio after the award has become enforceable, and is thus, prevented from considering an application for setting aside an ex parte award.

3. In view of the conflict between two decisions of this Court -Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, (2005) 9 SCC 331 and Radhakrishna Mani Tripathi v. L.H Patel and another, (2009) 2 SCC 81 by order dated 21.01.2011 in Haryana Suraj Malting Limited v. Phool Chand, (2012) 8 SCC 579 a reference to a larger bench was made in the following terms:

“1. Whether the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court becomes functus officio after 30 days of the pronouncement/publication of the award and loses all powers to recall an ex parte award on an application made by the aggrieved party after 30 days from the date of pronouncement/publication of the award is the question that once again arises for consideration in these cases.

2. It may be noted that on this question two Division Bench decisions have taken apparently conflicting views. In Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj a two-Judge Bench held and observed that an application for