JUDGMENT 1. - The appeal has been filed under Section 30, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter to be called 'the Act') for setting aside the order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Udaipur dated November 25,1989, dismissing the application of the non-petitioner-appellants moved under Order 9 Rule 13, C.P.C. read with Rule 41, Workmen's Compensation Rules, 1923, the ex parte award dated July 28,1987 and also the order dated July 3,1987 by which it ordered for proceeding ex-parte against the non-petitioner-appellants in the claim petition. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus. 2. The respondent's husband Kamji was working with the non-petitioner-appellants as the Beldar. While he was working on the road during the course of his employment, he was crushed by the truck No. RRQ 3312 of the Contractor. A claim petition was filed under Section 3 of the Act against the non-petitioner-appellants. In the reply, they admitted that he was working as a Beldar on monthly wages of Rs. 663/-, he met with an accident and as a result thereof he died on December 15,1985. It was further averred that the accident did not occur in the course of employment. July 3,1987 was fixed for the petitioner's evidence. On that day none was present for and on behalf of the non-petitioner-appellants. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner proceeded ex parte and recorded the evidence of the petitioner-respondents. He heard arguments on July 20,1987 and passed order on July 28, 1987 awarding Rs. 76,963,65 p. as compensation. 3. On November 24,1987, the appellants moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13, C.P.C. read with Rule 41, Workmen's Compensation Rules, 1923 for setting aside ex parte award along with an application under Section 5, Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Affidavits of Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer, National Highway, Kherwara Sub-Division, Yogendra Swaroop Mathur Assistant Engineer, National Highway, Mahua Sub-Division and Jamunashanker Dave, Executive Engineer, National Highway, Udaipur Division, photostat copy of the caused leave application of Yogendra Swaroop Mathur and transfer order dated August 26,1987 have been filed in support of the application. The petitioner-respondent filed replies seriously opposing it. After hearing the parties the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Udaipur dismissed the application by his order dated November 25,1989. 4. The petitioner-respondent filed replies seriously opposing it. After hearing the parties the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Udaipur dismissed the application by his order dated November 25,1989. 4. It has been contended by the learned Government Advocate that the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner seriously erred in not setting aside the order dated July 3, 1987 award dated My 28,1987 and also order dated November 24, 1987 despite the fact that sufficient cause was shown or the absence of the non-petitioner-appellants on July 3, 1987. He also contended that the non-petitioner-appellants No. 2 Shri Mathur proceeded on privilege leave and subsequently he was transferred therefrom and as such application for setting aside the order dated July 3, 1987 and award dated July 28,1987 could not be moved earlier and the non-petitioner-appellants could know about the ex parte order only after the receipt of the copy thereof on November 14,1987. He lastly contended that the aforesaid documents and affidavits duly support the application moved for setting aside the said order and ex parte award. 5. No substantial question of law arises in this appeal. Shri Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer, National Highway, Kherwara Sub-Division has stated in para No. 1 of his affidavit that Shri Y.S. Mathur, Assistant Engineer was transferred from Kherwara Sub-Division to Bheem Sub-Division, he succeeded him and on August 28,1987, he assumed the charge. He has further stated that no action could be taken in the said case by him as he was not aware of it. Shri Y.S. Mathur has stated in para No. 2 of his affidavit that he was Assistant Engineer, Kherwara Sub-Division from September 18,1986 to August 28, 1987. There is order No. 280 dated April 14, 1986 of the Executive Engineer, National Highway, Udaipur Division appointing said Shri Akhiluddin Assisant Engineer, National Highway, Kherwara Sub-Division as the Officer-in-Charge of this case. The reply dated June 30,1986 has been filed by said Shri Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer. It is thus clear that the said averments made in the affidavit of Shri Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer that he was not aware of the case after taking over the charge is not correct. 6. The reply dated June 30,1986 has been filed by said Shri Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer. It is thus clear that the said averments made in the affidavit of Shri Akhiluddin, Assistant Engineer that he was not aware of the case after taking over the charge is not correct. 6. Shri Yogendra Swaroop Mathur, Assistant Engineer, National Highway has stated in paras No. 4 and 5 of his affidavit dated November 24, 1987 as follows: " 4- ;g fd fnukad 3-7-1987 dh is'kh ds jkst esjk LokLF; Bhd ugha Fkk ,oa eSa detksjh eglwl dj jgk Fkk rFkk cspSuh eglwl dj jgk Fkk rFkk ;k=k djus esa fnDdr eglwl dj jgk FkkA ,oa bl fo'okl ij fd isuy yk;j is'kh ij mifLFkr jgdj dk;Zokgh djsaxs gh eSa is'kh ij gkftj ugha gks ldkA " " 5- ;g fd i'pkr~ esjh iRuh ds vLoLF; gksus dk lekpkj t;iqj esjs llqjky ls Kkr gksus ij eSa fnukad 27-7-87 dks t;iqj vkdfLed vodka'k ij pyk x;kA blds i'pkr~ esjk LFkkukUrj.k Hkhe gks tkus ls eSa LFkkukUrj.k ij fnukad 2-9-87 dks jokuk gks x;kA " 7. A photostat copy, paper No. 4 of the application for privilege leave of Shri Y.S. Mathur was for the period from July 27 to August 3, 1987. There is nothing on the record to indicate that Shri Mathur, Assistant Engineer enquired about the order passed on July 3,1987 in the case during the period from July 3, 1987 to September 2,1987. 8. The limitation for setting aside an ex parte decree/award is 30 days from the date of the decree/award vide Article 123, Limitation Act. Admittedly, the award passed on July 28, 1987 and application for setting it aside was moved on November 24,1987. The reason for the delay given is that the appellants were not aware of the ex parte award till its copy was received on November 14,1987. As per the order of appointment of the Officer in-charge, paper No. 11-12, it was the duty of the officer in-charge to always keep in touch with the lawyer and to apprise himself with the progress of the case. At the risk of repetition it may be mentioned that [there is nothing on the record to indicate that Shri Mathur even contacted Shri B.L. Asawa Advocate, Udaipur after July 3, 1987. At the risk of repetition it may be mentioned that [there is nothing on the record to indicate that Shri Mathur even contacted Shri B.L. Asawa Advocate, Udaipur after July 3, 1987. As such there was no sufficient cause for setting aside the order dated July 3,1987 and also the ex parte award dated July 28, 1987. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner was fully justified in passing the order dated November 29, 1989. Thus there is no force in this appeal. 9. Consequently, the appeal is summarily dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******