1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21868/2013 (L-TER) BETWEEN : M/s. Varga Attachments Pvt. Ltd. Phase I, KIADB, Industrial Area Malur, Kolar District Karnataka 563 130 Rep. by its Managing Director Mr. Mehul Gandhi S/o. Inderkumar Gandhi Aged about 48 years .. PETITIONER (By Sri. M. Raviprakash, Adv.) AND : 1. Commissioner of Labour Government of Karnataka Karmika Bhavana Bannerghatta Road Bangalore 560 029 2. Sri. Dinesh S/o. Basavalingappa Aged about 35 years r/a. Singenahalli Madenur Post Tiptur Taluk Tumkur District Presently r/a. Bagalagunte 2 Hesaraghatta Main Road Bangalore 560 073 .. RESPONDENTS (By Smt. Manjula Kamadolli, HCGP for R-1 Sri. Shankar S. Bhat, Adv. for R-2) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the award passed by 2 nd Addl. Labour Court, Bangalore in Ref. No.39/2010 dated 1.3.2013, etc. This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following : ORDER Though this petition is listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, is finally heard and disposed of by this order. 2. Petitioner, an industrial establishment, when arraigned as second party, in reference No.39/2010 before the II Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, in the matter of adjudication of an industrial dispute relating to termination of services of second respondent, under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, when issued with notice, entered appearance and did not prosecute the 3 matter and therefore, the Labour Court by the award dated 1.3.2013 allowed the reference, set aside the order of termination and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and consequential benefits and back wages. Hence, this petition by the management. 3. Petition is opposed by filing statement of objection of the 2nd respondent inter alia contending that despite several opportunities extended to the petitioner arraigned as second party in the proceeding before the Labour Court, did not utilize the opportunities and therefore, had nothing to offer as resistance to the claim statement filed by respondent No.2 leading to the award impugned. 4. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and examined the award impugned. 4 5. Regard being had to paragraph No.4 of the memorandum of writ petition stating the reasons for petitioner’s failure to prosecute the case before the Labour Court over the dispute of termination of service of the 2 nd respondent workman, coupled with the fact that the 2nd respondent is since reinstated on 16.9.2013 and paid Rs.1,43,264/- being 50% of the backwages, ends of justice would be met by remitting the proceeding for a fresh consideration after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties to lead evidence, both oral and documentary, and there afterwards, to pass an award strictly in accordance with law. 6. Writ petition is allowed. The award of the Labour Court is quashed and the proceeding remitted for consideration afresh, subject to the petitioner paying cost of Rs.2,000/- to first party workman, before the Labour Court on the next date of hearing. Parties since represented by learned Counsel are directed to be 5 present before the Labour Court on 29.10.2013, without further notice. Sd/- JUDGE Cs/- .