Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 797 (DEL)

MINISTRY OF TEXTILES v. UOI

2004-09-21

MADAN B.LOKUR

body2004
( 1 ) THE Petitioner is aggrieved by an Award dated 9th February, 2001 passed by the central Government Industrial Tribunal in ID no. 196/1995. ( 2 ) THE question that was referred for adjudication is as follows:- "whether the action of the management of Development commissioner for Handicrafts, Bharatpur in terminating the service of Shri Murari lal Gupta S/o Shri Bhag Chand Aggarwal as Chowkidar from employment with effect from 6. 12. 1987 is just and legal? if not, to what relief is the worker concerned entitled and from what date?" ( 3 ) THE Respondent/workman filed his statement of claim to which the written statement was filed by the Petitioner. For some reason, which is not clear from the record, the Petitioner stopped appearing in the matter and, accordingly, by an order dated 1st August, 1997, the Petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte. The Petitioner does not appear to have taken any steps to have the order dated 1st August, 1995 set aside and ultimately an ex-parte Award was passed against the Petitioner on 9th February, 2001. ( 4 ) THE Petitioner filed the present writ petition on 17th October, 2003 challenging the Award dated 9th February, 2001. There is a delay of over 21/2 years. ( 5 ) IT has been stated in paragraph 16 of the writ petition that a copy of the impugned award was received by the Petitioner sometime in September, 2001. Thereafter, some correspondence seems to have taken place and efforts made to compile the record and ultimately the writ petition was filed in october, 2003. There is absolutely no explanation given for the delay except to say that the correspondence ensued between the various officers of the Petitioner and efforts were made to file the record for as long as two years. ( 6 ) IN view of the fact that the delay in approaching this Court has not been explained satisfactorily by the Petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches. CM Nos. 13001 and 13003/2003 also stand dismissed.