30.09.2026 Item No.23 Ct. No. 30 Aloke WPA 26390 of 2026 M/s. Current Books International & Anr. Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sobhan Kr. Pathak Mr. Ranjan Kali Ms. Sneha Chakraborty … for the petitioners Ms. Nayan Rakshit Mr. Nilay Rakshit … for the private respondent Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar Mr. Mainak Biswas … for the State 1. Affidavit-of-service filed be taken on record. 2. The writ application has been preferred being aggrieved by an ex parte Award dated 24.03.2026, passed by the learned 4th Industrial Tribunal in connection with Case No. 24 of 2024 under Section 10(1B)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 3. On being served the respondents are being represented and have brought the notice of this Court to paragraph 2 at internal page 3 of the impugned Award. 4. The observations of the learned Tribunal was being relevant is reproduced herein : “The Record goes to show that several orders were passed and efforts were given to secure the appearance of the both the O.P. Employers to contest this case and ultimately on 02.12.2025 both the two O.P. Employers i.e. M/s. Current books international and its proprietor Mrs. Srabani Bhattacharya appeared through their 2 representative by filing fresh Vakalatnama and a petition, praying for setting aside the order of ex-parte hearing of the case. The said petition was allowed by this Tribunal subject to payment of cost of Rs 1,000/- but they were found reluctant to pay the said cost amount and to contest the case by filing any written statement as they remained absent on the subsequent dates. Ultimately, finding no other alternative hearing of this case was proceeded ex-parte against both the two O.P. Employers.” 5. Learned counsel for the State has placed a report and stated that the State authorities are in discussion with the parties in this case. 6. It further appears from the record that the private respondent/workman joined the petitioner establishment in the year 1998 and was terminated in 2022 after having served for 24 years. The letter of termination at page 24 shows that the said letter dated 31.05.2022, issued to the workman is prima facie not in accordance with law and the termination on the basis of such letter is prima facie bad in law, in view of the fact that admittedly none of the provisions to be complied with has been done while proceeding to terminate the employee and the said termination thus bad in law and also against the principle of natural justice. 7. Considering the said facts and the conduct of the writ petition herein, this Court finds no merit in 3 the writ application and there being no prima facie illegality in the impugned award. 8. The writ application stands dismissed. 9. Connected application, if any, stands disposed of. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)