WA/1027/2007 of The General Manager (Personnel), The Singareni Vs The Presiding officer,Industrial Tribunal on 28 December 2007

Conclusion

1. The Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-I,

Chandra Vihar, M.J. Road,

Hyderabad and another.

..Respondents

HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI

&

HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI

WRIT APPEAL No:1027 OF 2007

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari)

The present writ appeal is preferred by the appellant aggrievedby an order, dated 14.11.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge inWPMP No.7476 of 2004 & WPMP (SR) No.30213 of 2004 inW.P.No.1776 of 1996.

The appellant herein is petitioner in the writ petition. He filedthe writ petition challenging the award dated 19.8.1995 in I.D.No.23 of1993 passed by the Industrial Tribunal-I, at Hyderabad declaring thelockout declared by the petitioner-Management from second shift of24.10.1991 to third shift of 26.10.1991 as a sequel to mass casualleave by the executives as justified and further declaring that theaffected workmen on such lock out are entitled for their wages for thesaid lock out period, as illegal and arbitrary.

On 23.3.2000, the writ petition was dismissed for default. Then,the petitioner filed the above WPMP No.7476 of 2004 seeking tocondone the delay of 1332 days in filing the petition to set aside thedefault order dated 23.3.2000 on the ground that the clerk associatedwith the office of the petitioner’s standing counsel quit the office andthe bundle was mixed up with other files. The learned Single Judgehaving observed that the reasons furnished for delay in filing thepetition, are not satisfactory, dismissed the petitions. Havingaggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been preferred.

Heard and perused the entire material available on record.

As can be seen from the material on record, it is apparent thatthe main writ petition is filed challenging the award in I.D. and thesame was dismissed for default on the ground of failure to pay batta. Since the main writ petition is dismissed for default for failure to paythe batta and the issue involved in the main writ petition has to beadjudicated on its own merits, it is just and proper to dispose of the writ petition after affording an opportunity to both the parties. In thisview of the matter and in view of the reasons assigned in support of thepetition for condonation of delay, We feel it a fit case wherein the writpetition can be restored to file by condoning the delay in filing thepetition to restore the writ petition.

Accordingly, the order impugned is set aside on condition ofpayment of batta. Consequently, the WPMP No.7476 of 2004 andWPMP (SR) No.30213 of 2004 are allowed and the W.P. is restored tofile. Post the W.P. in regular Course.

Subject to the above direction, the writ appeal is disposed of.No order as to costs.

__________________________

Justice T. Meena Kumari

__________________

Justice G. Rohini

Date: 28[th] December, 2007

Nn/Gurc.

HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI&

HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G. ROHINI

WRIT PETITION No:27070 OF 2007

(Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari)

18.12.2007