AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The matter has come up on the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act.
The writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 25th October, 2007. The appeal, thereafter, was filed on 25th July, 2009. Thus, there is a delay of 574 days in filing appeal. The application for condonation does not explain the delay properly. The delay has to be explained properly, if not of day to day.
In view of the aforesaid, there is no justification for condonation of delay. We have considered the appeal on merit also.
It is a case where Labour Court passed award in favour of the workman. The award was challenged by the Appellants before the learned Single Judge. The writ petition was dismissed after taking into consideration the facts relevant to the matter.
An ex-parte order was passed by the Labour Court when the Appellants chose not to file reply. In absence of written statement, the matter was heard and decided after taking evidence. We do not find any illegality in the award so also impugned judgment. The award was passed otherwise in the year 2005 and a period of almost five years is going to pass. The Labour court came to the conclusion that the workman had completed 240 days of continuous service before retrenchment and compliance of Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act has not been made. While filing the appeal, nothing has been stated on the factual aspect so as to call for interference by this Court. Thus, we do not find any error in the impugned judgment.
In light of the aforesaid discussion, the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed on the ground of limitation and also on merit.