JUDGMENT :

1. The matter was today listed for vacating the interim order passed by this Court on 21.09.2022 and also conditions of application for compliance of Section 17(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947.

2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

3. The petitioner has preferred the instant petition assailing the award dated 07.07.2022 passed by Labour Court No. 1, Raipur, District Raipur in Case No. 77/I.D. Act/2018/Reference {Satyendra Singh Rajput v. S.B. Multimedia Private Limited} by which learned Labour Court has passed the ex-parte award against the petitioner directing reinstatement of respondent No. 1 – Satyendra Singh Rajput with full back-wages. The award was declared on 10.8.2022 after getting acknowledgment from Dy. Labour Commissioner, Raipur.

4. Brief facts reflected from record are that the services of respondent No. 1 who was working with the petitioner as video editor since 04.08.2008 were terminated on 6.9.2017, therefore, he has raised industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Raipur which was ended in failure, therefore, the appropriate government has referred the matter to the Labour Court for adjudication on the terms of reference dated 04.07.2018 whether the termination of service of the petitioner is legal and justify.

5. The respondent No. 1 has filed the statement of claim mainly contending that he was employed with the petitioner on the post of video editor on 04.08.2008 and has worked for more than 10 years and he was regular employee and also got promotion to the post of Associate Producer. The petitioner has terminated his services on 06.09.2017 without rhyme and reason, without any notice or conducting any departmental enquiry and would pray for reinstatement without back wages.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention of this Court towards the ordersheet of the case and would submit that the learned Labour Court issued notice to the petitioner. In pursuance of notice, the petitioner appeared on 15.10.2019, 10.12.2019, 21.10.2020 & 07.03.2020. On 07.03.2020 the said date, the presiding officer was notified to exercise power of presiding officer of Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1977. The matter was listed on 23.04.2020 thereafter, Covid19 pandemic was spread over the Nation, as such, all the proceedings pending before the Labour Court, trial Court, High Court and even before Hon'ble Supreme Court were effectively suspended. Thereafter, the matter was taken-up for hearing on 19.11.2020 and the matter was adjourned to 15.02.2021. On all the occasions of hearing, the petitioner did not make his presence before the Labour Court, consequently, on 17.03.2021, the Labour Court proceeded ex parte against the petitioner and fixed the case on 12.04.2021. The proceeding before the Labour 3 Court was again suspended on account of covid pandemic which resume on 07.08.2021 as such, the case was adjourned to 06.09.2021, 18.10.2021, 25.11.2021, 06.02.2022, 24.03.2022, 26.04.2022, 13.06.2022 and thereafter matter was listed on 06.07.2022. On the said date, the respondent No. 1 has examined himself and closed his case. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 07.07.2022. By referring to the ordersheet, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no material on record to demonstrate that after starting of proceeding which was kept in abeyance on account of covid pandemic, no notice of hearing was issued to the petitioner, therefore, it is incumbent upon the part of the Labour Court to issue notice to the parties. He would further submit that due to covid pandemic and in absence of any notice, the petitioner could not participate in the proceedings, as such, would pray for setting aside the exparte award dated 07.07.2022.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the ex-parte award was passed against them directing reinstatement of respondent No. 1 with full backwages then only, they came to know that an