By Azeez Nazar Sabri
In a landmark judgment in the matter of M/s. Haryana Suraj
Malting Ltd Vs. Phool Chand ( Civil Appeal No. 5649 of 2018 and 5893 of 2018 ), Supreme Court of
India has held that the Labour Court/Tribunal is not functus officio after the
award has become enforceable as far as setting aside an ex parte award is
concerned.
The question arising for consideration in this case was
whether the Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court is funtus officio after the award
has become enforceable, and is thus, prevent from considering an application
for setting aside an ex parte award.
On this issue there were conflicting decisions of two benches
of Apex Court in the matter of Sangham Tape Co. V. Hans Raj ( 2005) 9 SCC 331
and Radhakrishna Mani Tripathi V. L.H.Patel and another ( 2009) 2 SCC 81,
therefore a reference to larger bench was made with the following question of law:
Whether the Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court become functus officio
after 30 days of the pronouncement/ publication of the award and loses all
power to recall an ex parte award on application made by an aggrieved party
after 30 days from the pronouncement / Publication of award?
A larger bench of three judges held that merely because an
award has become enforceable, does not necessarily mean that it has become
biding. For an award to become binding, it should be passed in compliance with
the principles of natural justice. An award passed denying an opportunity of
hearing when there was a sufficient cause for non- appearance can be challenged
on the ground of it being nullity.
An award which is a nullity cannot be and shall not be a
binding award. In case a party is able to show sufficient cause within a
reasonable time for its non- appearance in the Labour Court/ Tribunal when it
was ex parte, the Labour Court/ Tribunal is bound to consider such an
application and the application cannot be rejected on the ground that it was
filed after the award had become enforceable.
It is
within the power of the Labour Court/ Tribunal to entertain an application as
per the scheme of the Act and in terms of the rules of natural justice. Court also restated that the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 is a welfare legislation intended to maintain industrial peace.
In that view of the matter, certain powers to do justice have to be conceded to
the Labour Court/ Tribunal, whether we call it ancillary, incidental or
inherent.
Bench
also observed that when an application for setting aside an ex parte award is
made at the instance of the management, the Labour Court/ Tribunal has to
balance equities.
No comments:
Post a Comment