eng
competition

Text Practice Mode

ROHIT TYPING CENTER (RTC) CHAKIYA RAJROOPUR PRAYAGRAJ U.P Allahabad High Court RO,ARO, 500 word english contact: 8299289045

created Nov 8th, 01:59 by rohittyping4


8


Rating

517 words
64 completed
00:00
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
Court No. - 26
 
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 26752 of 2017
 
Petitioner :- Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University through Registrar Lucknow & Anr
Respondent :- Union of India & Ors
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Tewari
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G,Ajmal Khan,Savitra Vardhan Singh
 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri Rajesh Tiwari, Advocate for petitioners and Sri Ambrish Dube, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajmal Khan, Advocate as well as Sri Savitra Vardhan Singh, Advocate for respondents.°
2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging award dated 30.09.2016 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in I.D. No. 26 of 2011 whereby Tribunal has answered reference in favour of Workman and directed that Workman shall be entitled to fruits of award dated 20.01.2014 with enhanced compensation of Rs. 1.25 lacs each which shall be paid within ten days, failing which interest of 6% per annum shall be paid.
3. It is contended that in adjudication case earlier an ex parte award was given on 20.01.2014. Subsequently, said award was recalled and thereafter Tribunal proceeded further and fixed various dates for proceedings. This is evident from para 15 onwards of award and the same may be reproduced as under:°
"15. Having gone through the case file and order sheet, it transpires that the workmen filed their oral evidence in form of their respective affidavits, during the tenure of my learned predecessor years back i.e. on 06.02.2013. The opposite party was absent on the said date, and thereafter none turned up either to put its appearance before this or to move any –- adjournment, which led to closure of opportunity to cross-examine the workman's witnesses vide order dated 10.05.2012 and date was fixed for opposite party's evidence on 21.06.2012. The opposite party again failed either to adduce its evidence or to put up its appearance before this Tribunal on several dates; and accordingly, 18.10.2012 was fixed for arguments vide order dated 23.08.2012. When the management of Ambedkar University did not turn up on several dates i.e. 18.10.2012, 23.11.2012, 16.01.2013, 01.03.2013, 22.04.2013, 04.06.2013, 26.07.2013, 09.09.2013, 17.10.2013, 02.12.2013 and 16.01.2014 only arguments of the authorized representative of the workmen was heard and file was reserved for award on 16.01.2014; and accordingly, the award dated 20.01.2014 was passed by this Tribunal and the same was sent to the appropriate Government, referring the case, for notification in the gazette, which in turn notified the same vide notification dated 19.02.2014. On receipt of copy of notification, the office of this Tribunal forwarded the copy of the award along with copy of gazette notification vide letter dated 17.07.2014.
16. When the management of the Ambedkar University received the award dated 20.01.2014, which directed the management to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 1 lac to each of the workman, it moved an application dated 13.08.2014 to recall the ex-parte award dated 20.01.2014, which was allowed on the payment of cost of Rs. 2000/- vide order dated 13.08.2015.
Rohit typing center.  
 

saving score / loading statistics ...