S.Saghir Ahmed and; D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.
1. Leave granted.
2. An ex parte order was passed against the appellant and Respondent 2 by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner on 8-11-1993. On a recovery certificate being issued for the amount of Rs 65,000 which was awarded as compensation, the District Nazir came to the appellant's factory to execute the certificate on 26-9-1995 and it was then that the appellant came to know of the ex parte award. On 6-10-1995, the appellant made an application under Rule 41 of the Workmen's Compensation (M.P.) Rules, 1962 read with Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte award dated 8-11-1993 but the application was rejected on 28-6-1997. The appellant thereafter approached the High Court by a writ petition which has been dismissed on the ground that the appellant had an alternative remedy. The High Court's short order which does not indicate the alternative remedy available to the appellant reads as under:
“Heard. As the petitioner has an alternative remedy, the petition is dismissed.”
3. A perusal of the Workmen's Compensation Act indicates that an order passed by the Commissioner rejecting an application for setting aside an ex parte award is not appealable. The appellant could approach only the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
4. That being so, the order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside. The writ petition is remitted back to the High Court for consideration on merits in accordance with law.
5. The amount of Rs 68,088 which is in deposit in this Court shall be made over to the High Court for disbursement, subject to the ultimate decision of the writ petition.