TIN BOX COMPANY Vs. INDERJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition the petitioner has prayed for a Writ of Certiorari for quashing the reference dated 15 -1 -1987 made by the Delhi Administration and also the order passed by the Labour Court dated 22nd February 1989 asking the petitioner to lead evidence first. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that at this stage he is not pressing the first part of the prayer but is only asking for the second part of the prayer that is the quashing of the order dated 22nd February, 1989, reserving, however, his right to agitate with respect to the first part at an appropriate stage.

(2.) HE pointed out the terms of reference of this industrial dispute in question which are as under : ''Whether the termination of Services of Shri Inderjit is legal and justified and if not to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect -

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Rule 10 B of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules 1957 which prescribes the procedure for proceedings before the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal. In sub -Rule 1 of Rule 10 -B it is prescribed that the party raising the dispute is required to file a statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses with the Labour Court within 15 days of the receipt of the order of reference. In the present case, the learned counsel submits that apart from filing a statement of claim the workman i.e. the respondent has not filed any relevant documents, list of reliance or witnesses which he was bound to do under the provisions of law.