The main legal point established in the judgment is that when a party has notice of the proceeding, the Tribunal is not obliged to issue any further notice or show cause prior to passing an ex-parte award.

JUDGMENT :

RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed, inter-alia, challenging the award dated 21st July, 1988 passed by the learned First Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that one Mr. Basudeb Basak was an employee of the writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the “workman”). The factum of appointment of the workman with the petitioner would corroborate from the letter of appointment dated 16th September, 1991. Subsequently, the petitioner by issuing a letter of confirmation dated 1st December, 1991, confirmed the services of the workman. Incidentally, by a communication in writing dated 3rd October, 1992 the petitioner informed the workman that he had been able to achieve business of Rs. 285 in the month of September, 1992 and his deficiency has crossed over Rs. 60000. It was further observed in such communication that in the event the said workman fails to cover up the total deficiency there shall be no alternative but to discontinue him from the service of the organisation.

3. Later in the year 1993, since, the said workman was kept idle, the respondent no. 3 alleging unfair labour practice by a communication dated 19th April, 1993, which was addressed to the Marketing Manager of the petitioner, had called upon him to restore the normal duties of the workman.

4. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, since, the workman was kept idle without being entrusted any work from 31st October, 1992, the respondent no. 3 by a communication in writing dated 14th May, 1993 sought for the intervention of the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, West Bengal. Although, a conciliation proceeding was initiated by the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, West Bengal, such conciliation having failed, the appropriate Government by an order dated 8th December, 1993 was, inter-alia, pleased to refer the aforesaid disputes to the learned First Industrial Tribunal by, inter-alia, framing the following issues:

“(1) Is the termination of services of Sri Basudev Basak justified?

(2) To what relief, if any is he entitled?”

5. In terms of the aforesaid reference, not only did the respondent no. 3 file its claim petition/written statement but the petitioner also entered appearance and filed its written statement before the learned Tribunal. The matter, thereafter, proceeded on contest. The respondent no. 3 had initially led oral evidence through the workman concerned. The workman was also cross-examined by the petitioner.

6. Subsequently, after conclusion of the oral testimony of the workman, one Sri Ashit Kr. Roy was examined on behalf of the petitioner on 13th March, 1997 as its witness. Later, he was also cross-examined not only on 13th March, 1997 but also on 15th December, 1997. The cross-examination of the petitioner’s witnesses was concluded on 15th December, 1997.

7. The petitioner had later filed an application for recall of its witness Sri Ashit Kr. Roy, on the grounds stated in such application. The said application for recall of witness was filed on 9th January, 1998. Final Hearing of such application could not proceed at least until 24th April, 1998 since, the Presiding Officer was not available. On 22nd May, 1998 as would reflect from the order no. 61, the learned Tribunal was, inter-alia, pleased to reject the said application observing that the same was vague and that on the basis of the written objection filed by the petitioner, the CW-1, Sri Ashit Kr. Roy had already been examined in full.

8. Incidentally, on the next date i.e. on 17th July, 1998 the petitioner again failed to appear. The respondent no. 3 was, however, present before the Tribunal and had advanced arguments. The matter was adjourned and fixed for passing award on 21st July, 1998. On 21st July, 1998 an ex-parte award was passed. It is only after passing of the aforesaid ex-parte award, the petitioner had applied for recall of the said ex-parte award. The verification in the application for recall w