AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pradeep Kumar, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the respondents.
It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that an ex parte order for payment of wages u/s 33C(2) of the I.D. Act has been passed directing the petitioner-Company to pay a sum of Rs. 12,775.96 to Yogendra Narain and Rs. 20,876.51 to Mahadeo Ram. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that although there is an order of the court dated 1.10.2004 for fixing the case for ex parte hearing on the ground that the show cause notice has been issued two months earlier and the petitioners have no interest in the case, as no steps have been taken on their behalf. Hence the case was fixed for ex parte hearing and order was passed, which is bad in law.
Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-workmen has contested the same and stated that since no step has been taken, ex parte order has been passed.
After hearing both the parties and going through the records, it appears that LCR was called for only to verify as to whether there has been valid service or not and from the lower court records and the impugned order, it is apparent that the postman or whoever went to deliver the registered notices could not meet, anybody.
In that view of the matter, the impugned award dated 22.12.2003 in M.J. Case No. 6/2003 is set aside and the matter is remanded back for passing fresh order by the Labour Court, Hazaribagh after hearing both sides and both the parties are directed to be present in Labour Court on 22nd November,2010 and file their respective written statements and the court below will proceed with the hearing of the case. Since the matter is an old matter of 2003 and the workmen are not getting their dues since long, the Labour court is directed to see that the matter is concluded within two months .
With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of.