OD-3 WPO/303/2026 IA No.GA/1/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ALPS EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED -VERSUS- THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL) Date : 10th September, 2026. Appearance: Mr. S. M. Obaidullah, Adv. Mr. S. Karmakar, Adv. ...for the petitioner. Mr. Nand Gopal Khaitan, Adv. Ms. Sristi Barman Roy, Adv. ...for the State. Mr. Jayanta Dasgupta, Adv. Mr. Balaram Patra, Adv. Mr. Sib Sankar Roy, Adv. ...for the respondent no.3. The Court: This writ application has been preferred challenging an award dated 5th October, 2018 passed by the learned Judge, 7th Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata in Case No.16/2A(2)/2016 and a notice dated 1st March, 2026 being Memo No.892/143(2)/LCO/1/2026/EL/LC dated 11th March, 2026, for implementation of an award dated 31.12.2024 passed by the 1st Labour Court, Kolkata in case no.37 of 2019 under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. By the said award, which was passed almost 8 years ago, the learned Judge, 7th Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata directed as follows: 2 “i) That the termination of employment of the applicant Pramod Kumar Yadav by the OP/Company M/s. ALPS Export Pvt. Ltd. w.e.f. 01.01.2014 by way of refusal of employment, be and the same is hereby held to be unjustified and unlawful and violative of Section 25F and such other provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and accordingly such termination is declared to be illegal and void and the same is set-aside; ii) That, the services of the applicant Pramod Kumar Yadav are directed to be reinstated with the OP/Company M/s. ALPS Export Pvt. Ltd. w.e.f. 01.01.2014, with further direction upon the OP/Company to pay full back-wages to the applicant as well as to accord full consequential benefits, in line with such reinstatement of the applicant in their service; iii) That, in the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. The aforesaid shall constitute the Award, passed ex-parte by this Tribunal in the instant Case No.23/2A(2)/2015, which shall stand disposed of, ex-parte.” It appears that initially the petitioner herein who was the opposite party/company before the Tribunal appeared before the Tribunal on 29th December, 2016 and also filed its written statement on 7th March, 2017. However, after that, in spite of being given sufficient opportunity, the opposite party/company failed to appear before the Tribunal and, thus, the Tribunal passed the award ex parte in the year 2018. The petitioner herein has further challenged the notice dated 11th March, 2026 wherein the Joint Labour Commissioner (P) EL & MW Section, Kolkata issued a notice for non-implementation of award dated 31st December, 2024 passed by the 1st Labour Court, Kolkata in case no.37 of 2019 under Section 33C(2) of the 3 Industrial Disputes Act whereunder the petitioner was directed to attend a joint conference before the Labour Commissioner. The petitioner, without appearing before the Labour Commissioner, approached the High Court. The petitioner has now challenged an award which was passed eight years ago and a notice which has been issued for implementation of an award passed on 31st December, 2024 under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The grounds stated by the petitioner praying for the reliefs are that there is no existence of employer-employee relationship and, that the award was passed even though the respondent/employee did not produce any document of his employment. Regarding the challenge to the initial award, the petitioner’s case is that there is no employer-employee relationship between the petitioner and the respondent-employee (driver of the company) herein. Even though in spite of due notice and appearance before the Tribunal, the petitioner did not counter the case and now has contested the said ex parte award eight years after it has been passed. It is on record that the respondent/employee proved a letter of authority issued by the petitioner/company herein authorizing the applicant to drive car No.WB-02 G 8055 (Exbt.-1). The respondent was employed from 2001 to 2013 (13 years) as a driver. The petitioner/company did not contest the case and, as such, did not adduce any evidence against the respondent’s Exbt.-1. As such, the contention of the petitioner, that the Tribunal proceeded without considering any documents placed by the respondent/employee in support of his claim, is not correct. The Tribunal rightly held that the provision of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes 4 Act, 1947 was not complied and thus holding the termination bad, directed reinstatement with full back wages. Thus, this Court finds no irregularity in the impugned award dated 5th October, 2018 passed in case no.16/2A(2)/2016, by the 7th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal. As a result, the impugned award under Section 33C(2) dated 31st December, 2024 passed by the 1st Labour Court, Kolkata in case No.37 of 2019 also being in accordance with law requires no interference. WPO/303/2026 stands, accordingly, dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. The connected application also stands disposed of. Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance of all requisite formalities. (SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.) A.Sadhukhan