Hind Kamgar Sanghatana v. M/S. Haier Appliances India Pvt Ltd.

k 1/2 32 wp 6478.24 as.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6478 OF 2024 Hind Kamgar Sanghatana ....Petitioner V/S M/s. Haier Appliances India Pvt. Ltd.

....Respondent _________ Ms. Seema Chopda a/w Mr. T.R. Yadav for the Petitioners. Mr. Mahendra M. Agavekar a/w Mr. Vijay P. Vaidya and Ms. Shraddha Chavan for Respondent.

__________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 23 OCTOBER 2024.

P.C.:

1.

It appears that there is an alternate remedy of filing an application for recall of order dated 26 October 2023 passed by the Industrial Tribunal. In fact Mr. Agavekar, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent-employer invites my attention to the judgment of the Apex Court in Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd. vs. Phool Chand, (2018) 16 SCC 567 in which the Apex Court has held in para 34 as under:

"34.

In case a party is in a position to show sufficient cause for its absence before the Labour Court/Tribunal when it was set ex parte, the Labour Court/Tribunal, in exercise of its ancillary or incidental powers, is competent to entertain such an application. That power cannot be circumscribed by limitation. What is the katkam Page No.

1 of

k 2/2 32 wp 6478.24 as.doc sufficient cause and whether its jurisdiction is invoked within a reasonable time should be left to the judicious discretion of the Labour Court/Tribunal."

2.

In that view of the matter, the Petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to make an application before the Industrial Tribunal for restoration of the Reference. While considering the said application, the time spent for prosecution of the present Petition shall be excluded.

(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) by SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Date: 2024.10.25 17:55:30 +0530 SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM katkam Page No.

2 of