An Industrial Tribunal retains jurisdiction to deal with an application for setting aside an exparte award only until the expiry of 30 days from the publication of the award. Thereafter, the Tribunal is relegated to the position of functus officio.

BIJITENDRA MOHAN MITRA, J.

( 1 ) THE Court : In this writ proceeding a challenge is thrown for issuance of writs in the nature of Mandamus and Prohibition against the concerned respondents being directed against order No. 28, dated 20. 12. 96 passed by the learned Judge, 4th Industrial Tribunal recalling the award dated 29. 6. 94. The resume of facts as emerging from the records appears that by an order of reference dated 30. 12. 93 for determination of issues as to whether (a) dismissal of Sri Ram Subhag Roy is justified (b) what relief, if any, he is entitled to. The parties to the dispute did not appear before the concerned Tribunal for adjudication of the issues referred to above and as such no step was taken. Accordingly, the Tribunal passed a no dispute award dated 29. 6. 94. The said award dated 29. 6. 94 was published under section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by an order No. 564-IR/11l-46/92 dated 27. 3. 55 issued by the Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department. Much after publication of the impugned award on 27. 3. 95 the respondent No. 3 filed an application under Rule 27 of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rule, 1958 on 5. 6. 95 for setting aside of the no dispute award. On the said application under Rule 27, as aforesaid, evidence was adduced by the respective parties and the Tribunal by Order No. 28, dated 20. 12. 96 has set aside the no dispute award and observed that question of limitation did not arise in this application.

( 2 ) THE moot point which permeates the range of controversy in this proceeding the question as to whether an ex parte award can be set aside by the learned Tribunal even after the award becomes enforceable under section 17a of the Industrial Disputes Act. The application under Rule 27 of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 was caused to be made incorporating the grounds taken by the said respondent that the notice under Rule 20a of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 was not properly served upon the Union as the office of the Union was shifted from 10, K. S. Roy Road to 188, Manicktala Main Road. Rules 27 of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 as incorporated contains provision for correction of errors and review of an order. It is significant to refer to the caption of Rules 27 which is founded on two limbs namely, (1) correction of errors and (2) review of an award. The ambit of correction of errors has been adumberated in clause I to III of Rule 27 itself and that is of wide amplitude. Even, the expression "for sufficient reason" is required to be interpreted in consonance with the principle of 'ejusdem generis', there is another dimension being founded about the review of an award. The Supreme Court had the occasion to deal with the said question in the case of Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal and Ors. , reported in AIR 1981 606. On construction of sub-section (1) of section 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act, it has been opined in the said decision by Supreme Court that the expression here namely, 'review' is used in two distinct senses namely, (1) a procedural review which is either inherent or implied in a Court or Tribunal to set aside a palpably erroneous order passed under a misappreciation by it and (2) a review when the error ought to be corrected is one of law and is apparent on the face of record. In the same breadth, the Supreme Court becomes inclined to propound the view that where a party is prevented from appearing at the hearing due to sufficient cause and is faced with an ex parte award it is as if a party is vested with an award without a notice of the proceedings. It is needless to stress that by the award Tribunal proceeds to make an award without notice to a party, the award is nothing but a nullity. In such circumstances, the Tribunal has not only the power but also the duty to set aside the exparte award and to direct the matter to be heard afresh. It

Click Here to Read the rest of this document