[2025:RJ-JP:16154] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6285/2024 Dilip Singh Gurjar Son Of Shri Munim, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Village Gurja, Post Sogarpura, Tehsil And District Karauli (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Karauli. 2. Director, Local Self Department, Raj. Civil Line Jaipur (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma Ms. Saroj Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG Mr. S.P. Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 15/04/2025 1. Though, the matter has come up on an application (1/2025) filed by and on behalf of respondents, seeking to recall the order dated 02.01.2025, however, with consent of counsel for both parties, writ petition itself has been heard finally on merits. 2. By means of filing instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner is seeking implementation of the award dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Labour Court, Bharatpur in LCR Case No. 02/2022 titled as Dilip Singh Vs. Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Karauli. 3. Undisputedly, the award has been passed in ex parte wherein petitioner has been directed to be reinstated as lineman/ [2025:RJ-JP:16154] (2 of 3) [CW-6285/2024] electrician w.e.f. 05.10.2020 and has been held entitled 40% of the monthly basis. 4. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents has pointed out that the award dated 20.09.2022 has not attained finality, since respondents have moved an application dated 31.10.2022 under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the award, because same was passed in ex parte and without giving opportunity of hearing to the respondents. 5. It has been pointed out that the applicant under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is pending before the Labour Court, Bharatpur for want of service of the petitioner-employee. 6. Having confronted with the afore-referred factual aspect, counsel for petitioner-employee, having instructions from petitioner, admits to give his presence before the Labour Court, Bharatpur in the pending proceedings under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, with a limited prayer that proceedings under Order 9 Rule 13 be directed to be adjudicated expeditiously and during that period, interest of petitioner be safeguarded appropriately. 7. Taking into consideration the fact that the award dated 20.09.2022 was passed ex parte and application to set aside the award has been filed by the respondents within time, counsel for both parties, having instructions from their respective clients, are agreeable to set aside the award dated 20.09.2022 on following terms:- (i) On condition of deposition of lumpsum amount of Rs. 4 lakhs by the respondents before the Labour Court, Bharatpur, within a period of four weeks, the award dated 20.09.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. [2025:RJ-JP:16154] (3 of 3) [CW-6285/2024] (ii) The Labour Court, Bharatpur is directed to keep the amount deposited by the respondents in FDRs before a Nationalized Bank and disbursement of same shall be governed by the final outcome of the case on merits. (iii) The Labour Court, Bharatpur is directed to decide the LCR Case No. 02/2022 afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to both parties in accordance with law and as early as possible preferably within a period of one year from the next date of appearance of parties before the Labour Court, Bharatpur, if possible. 8. In view of above, proceedings under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, allegedly pending before the Labour Court, Bharatpur stands disposed of. 9. With aforesaid directions, instant writ petition stands disposed of. 10. Since the writ petition has finally been disposed of, the order dated 02.01.2025 stands recalled. 11. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /487