Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Arun Bhansali, J.
Sugna Ram - Appellant
Versus
Birla White Cement, Kharia Khangar, Tehsil Bhopalgarh - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 11488 of 2019
Decided On : 18-09-2019
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 - SECTION 17A - LIMITATION ACT, 1963 - SECTION 5 - RESTORATION OF PROCEEDINGS - DELAY IN FILING APPLICATION - CONDONATION - JURISDICTION OF LABOUR COURT - AWARD - BINDING NATURE - NATURAL JUSTICE - COMPROMISE - WITHDRAWAL OF CLAIM - REINSTATEMENT OF DISPUTE - EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF RESTORED DISPUTE - FACTUAL AND LEGAL ANALYSIS OF COURT'S DECISION ON RESTORATION OF PROCEEDINGS AND SETTING ASIDE OF AWARD.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a blind individual, filed a dispute with the Labour Court regarding the validity of his termination. Despite seeking time on multiple occasions, he failed to file a statement of claim. The Labour Court subsequently passed a no-dispute award, which was published and became enforceable. The petitioner then filed an application to set aside the award and restore the proceedings, claiming that he had withdrawn his claim due to a compromise with the employer, which was not honored. The Labour Court rejected the application, relying on the judgment in Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, which held that the Labour Court loses jurisdiction to set aside an award 30 days after its publication.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the Labour Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's application without examining the material produced by the petitioner and without considering the glaring circumstances of the case, including the petitioner's blindness. The Court also noted that the Labour Court was overawed by the judgment in Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, which has since been overruled by the Supreme Court in Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd. v. Phool Chand. The Court further held that the reasons indicated in the application were sufficient for condonation of delay and that the award was a nullity as it was passed without compliance with the principles of natural justice.
Issues: 1. Whether the Labour Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's application to set aside the award and restore the proceedings without examining the material produced by the petitioner and without considering the glaring circumstances of the case, including the petitioner's blindness? 2. Whether the Labour Court was justified in relying on the judgment in Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, which has since been overruled by the Supreme Court in Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd. v. Phool Chand? 3. Whether the reasons indicated in the application were sufficient for condonation of delay? 4. Whether the award was a nullity as it was passed without compliance with the principles of natural justice?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Labour Court erred in rejecting the petitioner's application without examining the material produced by the petitioner and without considering the glaring circumstances of the case, including the petitioner's blindness. 2. The Labour Court was not justified in relying on the judgment in Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, which has since been overruled by the Supreme Court in Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd. v. Phool Chand. 3. The reasons indicated in the application were sufficient for condonation of delay. 4. The award was a nullity as it was passed without compliance with the principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed and set aside the order of the Labour Court, allowed the petitioner's application for condonation of delay and restoration of proceedings, set aside the award, and restored the dispute to its original number to be proceeded in accordance with law. The Court directed the Labour Court to proceed with the matter expeditiously and ensure that it is decided preferably within four months from the date a copy of the order is placed before it.
JUDGMENT
Arun Bhansali, J. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 18.05.2018 (Annex.-7) passed by the Labour Court, whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking setting aside of order/award dated 02.06.2008, has been rejected.
2. The petitioner on a dispute being referred by the appropriate Government was required to file his statement of claim pertaining to termination of his services w.e.f. 14.08.1988. However, after seeking time on four occasions, when the matter was listed before the Labour Court on 02.06.2008, the following order-sheet was drawn:-
3. Pursuant thereto, no dispute award dated 02.06.2008 (Annex.-4) has been passed, which award ultimately got published on 12.03.2009.
4. The present application seeking restoration was filed by the petitioner on 09.07.2017, inter alia, indicating that the claim was withdrawn by the petitioner, on account of assurance given/compromise arrived at between the parties, however, the same was not followed by the employer, and vacillating stands pertaining to the said aspects are being taken and ultimately the proceedings initiated by the petitioner before the authority under the Factories and Boilers Act, on account of jurisdiction, were disposed of and, therefore, the petitioner was left with no option but to approach the Labour Court for restoration of the proceedings.
5. Alongwith the application seeking restoration, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed seeking to explain the delay in filing the restoration application.
6. The application was contested by the respondents by filing reply, inter alia, indicating that there was no compromise between the parties and as the statement of claim was not filed on various dates, the same was withdrawn. Further, the averments made seeking to explain the delay in filing the application was also contested.
7. The Labour Court after hearing the parties, came to the following conclusion:-
In view of this court decision in Grindlays Bank (Supra), such jurisdiction could be exercised by the Labour Court within a limited time, frame, namely within thirty days from the date of publication of the award. Once an award becomes enforceable in terms of Section 17A of the Act, the Labour Court or the Tribunal, as the case may be, does not retain any jurisdiction in relation to setting aside of any award passed by it. In other words, upon the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication of the award in the gazette, the same having become enforceable, the Labour Court would become functus officio.
8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the conclusion arrived at by the Labour Court for rejecting the petitioner's application, is not justified, inasmuch as, no reasons have been indicated for rejection of petitioner's application except for a one line determination that the reasons indicated were not sufficient/appropriate.
9. Further submission has been made that the application has been essentially rejected relying on judgment in Sangham Tape Co. v. Hans Raj, (2004) AIR SC 4776 , which judgment has been over-ruled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd. v. Phool Chand, (2018) AIR SC 2670 .
10. Further submissions have been made seeking to explain that the respondents have been taken vacillating stands and have, deprived the petitioner from getting his dispute adjudicated before the Labour Court and after withdrawal of the dispute, have failed to honour their agreement/compromise and as such even on merits, the petitioner has a good case.
11. Further submissions were made that passing of no dispute award, also is not justified in view of the definition of term 'award' as contained Section 2(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and, therefore also, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside.
12. Reliance has also been placed on Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors., (1987) AIR SC 1353 and United India Insu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
