MAHINDER SINGH Vs. NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEACH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present petition the Petitioner impugnes the order dated 4 th January, 2012 whereby the learned Industrial Tribunal permitted the Respondent/ management to allow the application of the Respondent subject to a cost of Rs. 3000/- and permitted it to lead additional evidence to prove the charge against the Petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner relying upon Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Lakshmidevamma (SMT) and Anr., 2001 5 SCC 433states that it is now settled that the learned Tribunal has the power to permit the management to adduce fresh evidence if the enquiry is found to be vitiated, however no application of the management can be entertained at a belated stage. It is further stated that the decision in Divyash Pandit Vs. Management, NCCBM, 2005 2 SCC 684was on the peculiar facts of that case and did not hold that the application of the management can be entertained even after the issue of enquiry has been held against it. Thus, the impugned order be set aside.

(3.) Learned counsel for the Respondent on the other hand relying upon the majority decision in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation and Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sunil Kumar,2010 117 DLT 144contends that as per the majority decision there is no dispute that the Court has the power to permit the management to lead additional evidence and thus allowing the application of the Respondent permitting it to lead fresh additional evidence is not contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court and this Court.