MRF LTD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THE petitioner is the Management. THEy have come forward to challenge in these writ petitions the order passed by the first respondent Tribunal in various Miscellaneous Application Nos.86 to 91 of 2001 in Approval Petition Nos.69,57,118,58, 124 and 70 of 1995.

(3.) THE Tribunal held that though the employer is entitled to raise alternative plea, that should be raised in the counter pleadings or within a reasonable time, but not after six years, after the approval petitions were filed and that too after coming to know the workmen's stand regarding validity of the enquiry. THE Tribunal followed the Supreme Court's Judgment rendered in Shambhu Nath Goyal vs. Bank of Baroda reported in 1983 4 SCC 491. Though the said judgment was doubted, subsequently it came to be upheld by a Constitution Bench vide its Judgment in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs. lakshmidevamma (Smt) and another reported in (2001) 5 SCC 433. THE Tribunal on the basis of the Judgment in Shambhu Nath Goyal's case held that the request made by the Management was not bonafide and the request for letting additional evidence at any stage before the publication of the award did not mean that at all times the employer seek such permission and the bonafides of the Management will have to be considered.