JUDGMENT : Hari Lal Agrawal, J. - In this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the point involved is as to whether the Industrial Tribunal, Patna, was right in dismissing for default the appeal of the petitioner filed under section 28(7) of the Bihar Shops & Establishments Act, 1953. 2. Hazari Lal Gupta, respondent no. 4, filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, respondent• no. 2, claiming a sum of Rs. 2,100/- as arrears of wages from 1.11.65 to 31.5.66 and another sum of Rs. 2,260/- as other benefits, e.g., overtime, wages for leave etc., (vide his claim petition Annexure (1), totalling Rs. 4,360/-. The respondent no. 2, however, allowed the amount of all the claims except compensation of Rs. 500/- vide his JUDGMENT : dated 9.12.77 (Annexure 4). The petitioner filed an appeal before respondent no. 1. On 27.9.1978 he had filed a petition for adjournment before the appellate authority, but for the reason stated in the ORDER :(Annexure 6) that sufficient time had been allowed to the petitioner and the date for heating was peremptory, he rejected the said application and dismissed the appeal for default. 3. It has been argued by learned Advocate for the petitioner that in the absence of any provision for dismissing the appeal for default, in the Shops Act, the respondent no. 1 was not justified in. dismissing the appeal for default and he should have disposed of the appeal on merits even in the absence of the petitioner. The provision of appeal is contained in sub-section (7) of section 28 of the Shops Act which reads as follows:- "An appeal against an ORDER :dismissing either wholly or in part an application made under sub-section (1) or against a direction made under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) may be preferred in such manner, within such time and to such authority as may be prescribed and such authority shall consider and dispose of such appeals in the prescribed manner." The relevant rule framed under the Act regarding appeal reads as follows: "24 (4) The Appellate Authority after hearing the parties and after making such further enquiry, if any, as it may deem necessary, may confirm, vary or set aside the direction from which the appeal is preferred, and shall record an ORDER :accordingly with reasons therefor. The ORDER :s so passed shall be communicated to the parties without delay." No other provision appears to be there either in the Act or in the Rules dealing with appeal. 4. After examining the scheme of the Act and the Rules and giving my anxious consideration to the point raised by the learned Advocate, I find that his contention has got substance and must be accepted. I may usefully refer to a Bench Decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Jamait Ram Puraswami and others v. Sri H. G. Shukla and others (1977 L.I.C. 1499). There the appeal was filed under section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, which was similarly dismissed for default of the appellant by the learned District Judge and then an application under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed before the Lucknow Bench. It was held that there were no specific provisions in the special Act for dismissing an appeal for default like that contained in ORDER :XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, the appeal had to be decided on merits even when the party concerned had failed to appear. 5. I may take support also from the case of Shyam Deo Pandey and others v. The State of Bihar (A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 1606) in this connection, where the Supreme Court dealing with the dismissal of a criminal appeal, have observed that perusal of record of a particular case and giving indication of such perusal in the ORDER :and JUDGMENT : is a must before dismissing an appeal which has been admitted and notice whereof has been issued on the ground of nonappearance of the appellant and his pleader. 6. Sub-section (9) of the aforesaid section 28, while conferring certain powers on the authority appointed under this section, prescribes that they have all the powers of the Civil Court, but the general power is circumscribed by the subsequent addition that those powers will be confined only for the purpose of taking evidence and for enforcing the attendance of witnesses and compelling production of documents. The general provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure as such have not been made applicable and, therefore, in the absence of any specific provision in the special Act for dismissing an appeal for default as contained in rule 17 of ORDER :XLI of the Code when a party concerned is absent, the appeal should not be dismissed for default. The Legislature, therefore, has not intended for dismissal of this appeal for default and the appeal of the petitioner should have been disposed of on merits. 7. I would accordingly allow this application, set aside the JUDGMENT : of respondent no. 1 contained in Annexure 6 and remit the matter back to him for fresh disposal on merits. Since the matter is going back, respondent no. 1 will be well advised to give an opportunity to both the parties to appear before him and make their submissions. In ORDER :to avoid further delay, I direct both the parties to appear before him on 17.2.85 with a copy of this JUDGMENT :, who will then fix a date for hearing of the appeal in their presence according to their convenience. In the circumstances, however, I shall make no ORDER :as to costs.