SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT LTD Vs. SURENDER VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent has appeared in person and states that he is unable to engage a counsel despite the fact that he had contacted the Delhi High Court Legal Services Authority for the said purpose. Ms. Jyoti Singh, advocate, who is present in Court today, is appointed as an amicus curiae and requested to assist the Court.

(2.) With the consent of the parties, the matter has been taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

(3.) The petitioner has assailed the order dated November 18, 2006, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court on an application moved by the petitioner/ management seeking amendment of the written statement. The brief facts which are relevant for deciding the petition are that on September 9, 2004, the respondent/workman had filed his statement of claim before the Labour Court, alleging therein that he was in employment of the petitioner/management since March, 2001, and his services were illegally terminated on July 13, 2004, without giving him any notice. The petitioner/management filed its written statement on January 12, 2004, wherein the claim of the respondent/workman was denied. Thereafter, trial commenced and matter was fixed for recording evidence on March 3, 2005. It is not denied by either of the parties that the respondent/workman is at present being cross-examined by the petitioner/management and that the matter is now listed before the Court for recording further evidence on March 6, 2007.