Heard both sides. The petitioner, who was a Conductor employed in the first respondent Corporation, has come forward to challenge the award passed by the second respondent Labour Court in I.D.No.246 of 2006, dated 09.12.2009 in dismissing the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner.

2. According to the petitioner, an agreement was allegedly reached on 2.3.2007 before the third respondent (Lok Adalat). Thereafter, no award can be passed and hence the ex-parte award was illegal. It is seen from the records that the petitioner, who was working as a Conductor was dismissed from service on 3.3.1999 on account of his unauthorised absence from 4.6.1997 to 22.6.1997. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Conciliation), Chennai. In the conciliation proceedings, the management took the stand that the petitioner cannot be reinstated in view of the misconduct committed by him.

3. On the strength of the failure report, the petitioner filed a claim statement as per Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Labour Court, Chennai. The I Additional Labour Court (2nd respondent), to which the matter was assigned, took