Summary
The Supreme Court held that enforceability of an industrial award does not extinguish the Labour Court’s or Tribunal’s power to consider setting aside an ex parte award. Procedural recall remains available on sufficient cause for non-appearance shown within a reasonable time. Resolving the conflicting decisions, it remitted the awards for consideration of that cause and directed provisional payment of Rs.1 lakh to the workmen in each case, subject to adjustment against the final outcome.
Issues
- Whether a Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal becomes functus officio for recalling an ex parte award once it becomes enforceable.
- What conditions govern procedural recall and the consequential relief in the pending appeals.
Provisions considered
- Section 11(1), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947The power to regulate procedure carries ancillary and incidental powers necessary to afford a fair hearing and correct a vitiating procedural defect. (¶¶ 5, 12, 30, 35)
- Section 20(3), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947Deemed conclusion of proceedings when the award becomes enforceable does not exclude procedural recall of an ex parte award for sufficient cause. (¶¶ 7, 35)
- Rules 10B(9), 22 and 24, Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957The procedural framework for proceeding ex parte and regulating hearings supports the power to examine sufficient cause for absence and recall a procedurally defective award. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 12, 21, 30)
Held
- A Labour Court or Tribunal is not functus officio, as regards setting aside an ex parte award, merely because the award has become enforceable. Such an application cannot be rejected solely because it was filed after enforceability. (¶¶ 30, 32, 35)
- Recall for a procedural defect going to the root of the hearing differs from reconsideration on merits. The former is supported by ancillary and incidental powers and the broader principles underlying Order IX Rule 13; substantive review requires statutory authority. (¶¶ 21, 22, 29, 30)
- The applicant must show sufficient cause for non-appearance and invoke jurisdiction within a reasonable time. Both matters are for the judicial discretion of the Labour Court or Tribunal; the Limitation Act does not apply to these fora. (¶¶ 30, 32, 33, 35)
- Where management seeks recall, equities must be balanced. The awards were remitted to examine sufficient cause, with provisional payment of Rs.1 lakh in each case to the workmen, adjustable according to the final outcome. (¶ 36)
Result
Appeals disposed of. Awards remitted to the Labour Court to consider sufficient cause for management’s non-appearance. Appellants to pay the workmen Rs.1 lakh provisionally in each case, subject to final adjustment.