MANAGEMENT Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of both sides, the writ petition itself was taken up for final disposal.

(2.) PRAYER in the writ petition is to quash the order of the first respondent dated 18.6.2007 passed in I.D.No.181 of 2002.

(3.) ON conclusion of the evidence of MW-1 and WW-1, the matter was posted for arguments and at that time, the petitioner felt that both the parties can be given a chance to adduce evidence to decide the matter on merits. In the counter statement also the petitioner stated that it may be given a chance to prove the misconduct if the Labour Court come to the conclusion that the enquiry held was not fair. ON 29.5.2007, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before the Labour Court that petitioner may be granted permission to lead further evidence on merits of the case as if the domestic enquiry held against the second respondent was not fair. The first respondent rejected the said request of the counsel by stating that the petitioner has not made a prayer in the counter statement that in the event of the enquiry being vitiated, it should be given an opportunity to prove the charges afresh. By order dated 18.6.2007, the first respondent rejected the request to lead further evidence and the same is challenged in this writ petition.