MANOJ KESHUBHAI MAVADIYA Vs. SUPERINTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned AGP Ms. Megha Chitaliya, waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent No.1.

(2.) This petition is filed by the petitioner - workman under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Court No.2, Jamnagar, in Reference (L.C.J.) Case No.53 of 2006, whereby the reference filed by the petitioner came to be rejected.

(3.) Heard Mr. Yogen Pandya, learned advocate for the petitioner - workman. It is submitted by him that only reason assigned by the Labour Court for rejection of reference is, the absence of the petitioner - workman after tendering examination-in-chief on oath for the purpose of, cross examination by the other side. According to his submission, even respondents have never attempted to lead any evidence or even remained present before the Labour Court. Therefore, rejection of reference solely on that ground without affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner - workman, as no strict rules of evidence is applicable to such reference, the reference could not have been rejected by the Labour Court.