KATWA INFOTECH LIMITED BELGAUM Vs. BHASKAR LAXAMANRAO PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is challenging the order of the Labour Court dated 20-9-2004 passed in reference No. 185 of 2002 in the matter of appearance under Section 36 (2) (a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(2.) PETITIONER is a company engaged in the business of medical transcription. Respondent in the light of his termination from the petitioner-company raised a dispute in terms of the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act. Matter was referred to the Labour Court. One mr. Hansi filed authorisation on 16-5-2004 in his capacity as an executive Committee Member of the Indian Employers Federation to represent on behalf of the petitioner-company. The same was objected to by the respondent. Matter was heard. After hearing, the Court has chosen to reject the appearance of Mr. Hansi in the matter. This order is challenged in this petition. 2-A. Contesting respondent has entered appearance through caveat. He opposes the petition.

(3.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner. He would invite my attention to the bye-laws of Indian Employers Federation to contend that representation by Mr. Hansi is in order. He particularly invites my attention to Clause 10 of the bye-laws in this regard. He also refers to me Clause 15 (f) in the matter of representation before the authorities learned Counsel in the light of this material would say that Labour court is wrong m rejecting the appearance of Mr Hansi Petitioner also took me through the impugned order to say that the rejection is on the ground that the officer has to be a paid employee This finding according to the petitioner is contrary to law governing such matters