The Odisha

G a z e t t e

EXTRAORDINARY

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 229 CUTTACK, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2024/MAGHA 12, 1945

LABOUR & E.S.I. DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

The 24th January 2024

S. R. O. No. 61/2024—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(14 of 1947), the Award dated the 30th December 2023 passed in the I.D. Case No. 26 of 2015

by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar to whom the industrial dispute between the

In-charge, Sports Hostel, Talabania, Puri and Shri Prafulla Kumar Behera, S/o Late Fakira Behera,

At Chakratirth Road, Puri was referred to for adjudication is hereby published as in the schedule

below :—

SCHEDULE

IN THE LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 26 of 2015

Dated the 30th December 2023

Present :

Smt. Aparna Mohapatra,

Presiding Officer,

Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.

(JO CODE - OD-0408)

Between :

The In-charge,

. .

First Party—Management

Sports Hostel,

Talabania, Puri.

And

Shri Prafulla Kumar Behera,

. .

Second Party—Workman

S/o Late Fakira Behera,

At Chakratirth Road, Puri.

Appearances :

Shri Sarat Chandra Nanda

. .

For the First Party—Management himself

Shri Prafulla Kumar Behera

. .

For the Second Party—Workman himself

AWARD

The Government of Odisha in the Labour & E.S.I. Department in exercise of powers conferred

upon it by sub-section (5) of Section 12 read with Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the ID Act’) have referred the following dispute for adjudication

by this Court vide their Memo No. 4524-LESI., dated the 19th May 2015.

“Whether the action of the Management of Sports Hostel, Puri terminating the services

of Shri Prafulla Kumar Behera with effect from the 10th July 2012 is legal and/or

justified ? If not, what relief he is entitled to ?”

2. On close scrutiny of the case record, it is found that after receipt of the above dispute

from the appropriate Government notice was issued to the workman for filing of his statement of

claim through post vide this Office Letter No. 1126, dated the 25th August 2015, but the workman

neither appeared nor filed his statement of claim. It is further found that the copy of the above

reference was also issued to the second party workman by the Government in Labour & E.S.I.

Department vide their Memo No. 4525, dated the 19th May 2015 with a direction to file a statement

of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before this Court within

15 days of the receipt of the order of reference. However, the second party at a later stage appeared

in this case, but he did not file his statement of claim so also rejoinder despite direction of this

Court. But from the materials filed in this case on behalf of the management, it came to light that

relating to the present issue in dispute the second party has also filed a Writ Petition vide WP(C)

No. 16979 of 2014 before the Hon’ble Court and it has come to the notice from the Hon’ble High

Court’s website that the same is subjudice. So, it is clear that the second party on one common

issue i.e., the present issue in question has filed two separate cases before two different forums

which cannot be legally sustainable. Thereafter, registered notices were also issued to both the

parties for their appearance in order to proceed with this case, but none of the parties turn up.

Meanwhile, more than 08 years have already elapsed, but the second party has neither appeared

nor filed his pleadings in this case. So, it can be presumed that the second party being the author

of this case, is not interested to proceed with in this case as he has already filed a similar nature

of case (as stated above) before the Hon’ble High Court. That apart, when a case is pending

before the Hon’ble Court over the present matter, it is not wise to continue with the present case.

Besides, the Hon’ble Court has been pleased to press hard for the early disposal of these year old

cases till the year 2017 by the end of this December. Thus in absence of pleadings from the side

of the workman and no evidence on record, it is not possible to answer the reference in any

manner. Considering the above facts and circumstances this Court is constrained to pass a ‘No

Dispute Award’ in the case. Accordingly, a ‘No Dispute Award’ is passed in so far as the present

reference is concerned.

Dictated and corrected by me.

APARNA MOHAPATRA

30-12-2023

Presiding Officer

Labour Court, Bhubaneswar

[No. 615—LESI-IR-ID-0002/2024-LESI]

By order of the Governor

NITIRANJAN SEN

Additional Secretary to Government

Printed and Published by the Director, Directorate of Printing, Stationery and Publication, Odisha, Cuttack-10

Ex. Gaz. 2439–173+9