1. Heard finally by consent of the parties. After hearing both the parties on 21st June 2012, I have already given reasons and adjourned the matter for the respondents to place more material on record in support of the exparte order and the reasons for rejecting application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the same and for restoration of the original proceedings. The reasons so recorded need to be treated as a part of this order also.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has again relied on the reasoning given by the learned Industrial Court, basically, on paragraphs 5 to 8 and 9 and thereby contended to maintain the order. However, the respondents are unable to place any material on record, for which time was granted. Admittedly, the application for bringing Mr.Amar Anilkumar Kejriwal on record was filed by the respondent without taking note of and/or without verifying about other legal heirs of the deceased. Admittedly, no such person in the name of Mr.Amar Anilkumar Kejriwal is legal heir of the deceased. The services made by pasting, even if any, that cannot be treated as good service unless proper and legal heirs are brought on record of the